Culture War Chat With Quintus: European Crisis Edition

Quintus and I just wrapped up Culture War Chat 4 about the Paris terrorist attacks, the European migrant crisis, the Black Lives Matter coup attempts in American universities, and my recent road trip through the Midwest.

You can also listen to the MP3 and download it through Soundcloud.

Follow Quintus Curtius on Twitter: http://twitter.com/QuintusCurtius
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/rooshv

Don’t Miss: Europe Is On The Precipice

125 thoughts on “Culture War Chat With Quintus: European Crisis Edition”

  1. Did the Culture Wars begin in America with the Civil War? ABSOLUTELY!
    Something sinister is afoot in Dixie! The year is 1859 and Forty-Eighters are roaming the South inciting slave rebellion and murdering plantation owners. Riding through the South with his slave partner Luther King, German bounty hunter/slave trader/preacher Drango seeks to destabilize the very fabric of Southern Society. Carrying the Communist Manifesto instead of the Holy Bible, Drango seeks to promulgate his new religion of Marxism with bloody social justice. Lock up your daughters and wives because Drango has come to spread his ideology with fire-brand, pistol and shot.
    Georgia plantation owner Cotton Candy is out for bloody revenge! His cousins, Clay and Clara Candy, were murdered at their Mississippi plantation, gunned down in cold blood by Drango and his slave Luther. Cotton has convened a secret meeting with some of the South’s most powerful men who belong to the Knights Of The Golden Circle, whose purpose is to maintain order and expand their power and prestige. The South will rise, this slave insurrection will be quashed and Drango Must Die!!!
    http://www.magnoliahousefilms.com

  2. People like us tend to see our countries as a single force that naturally pulls for our own collective interest, like a closely knit family. But the truth is societies come built in with domestic enemies. People who look and sound just like you, but hate the country because it’s too oppressive/successful/unfair or whatever
    I think the first step to revolution is ideological – the West’s liberal democratic ideals have to be overturned in order for there to be progress. The average person has to question equality and compassion. The neoreactionary movement brewing in the techno-nerd community is a very good thing to bring to the mainsteam. Replace “conservatism” with that, and the right would have a much better fighting chance

    1. Agree. I just wish the west would stop trying to help everybody else, giving the US/Nato a free ticket to ‘spread democracy’, which is organised terror on behalf of the zionists.
      The west is waking up to the fact that their ideas are not universal. Even their brilliant ones. They (may) work in the west. End of story.

      1. Do they even work int he West?
        – The EU is actually a technocratic dictatorship.
        – In the US, minor parties have litterally no say.

    2. This is really well said and correct. Unfortunately, I do not think this is possible. The genius about the modern west is what they have done with money.
      When I was young there was maybe one or two people in high school with cars….beat up 10 year old shit boxes…but cars. I honestly think car leases were the beginning of the end. If “religion is the opium of the masses” then property and luxury goods ownership is definitely proper heroin.
      Two people who get married with decent and respectable jobs. Let’s say he is a tax accountant and she is a kindergarten teacher. Let’s say that combined they have a salary of 100k and health insurance enough to avoid any serious long term debt accrued in case of really bad illness.
      Obviously they live in a rural are or middle class suburb as their combined salary wouldn’t be enough to live in Manhattan.
      What do they do? Save, go without, sacrifice so that their kids get a leg up and then their kids after and then their kids after? Absolutely not.
      Mr and MRs whatever have good credit because they have a high spending history of paying minimum balance on credit cards and take that credit to buy their dream house. How lovely. Then decorate it. Then get nice cars. No way they are tooling around in some beat up yet reliable POS. Not when for a mere 300 a month they can lease a like new pre owned BMW.
      Then they pop out their 2.3 kids, get their dog and everything looks just fucking dandy. That is until you realize that their discretionary spending is down to zero because after meeting their obligations they have no money left. College fund? No, that’s ok…the kids will get themselves into 300k of debt and HOPEFULLY get a degree where they will make 50k a year.
      Well, bed time is fun. Poor schmo is losing his hair and getting fat working overtime, cortisol pumping through him from stress, hasn’t had a night out in 3 years. Meanwhile, our kindergarten teacher is getting the tingles for some dipshit she sees in the supermarket. She will eventually blow him or not, but either way the marriage is crumbling.
      This whole scene is repeated dozens of times in each community and neighborhood of each borough of each city and each state from New York to California.
      What’ the point you ask? Look at revolutionaries. Look at the guys running around with Castro and Che or even these ISIS turds. Look at their faces. They are filled with youthful excitement. They are believers. They are changing the world. They aren’t shackled in by all the things they were told they had coming to them since they were kids.
      If religion sedated the masses, then the artificial/superficial desire for material objects and status and it’s interplay with debt has totally paralyzed them.
      The idea that, without the intervention of a catastrophe with a death toll in the millions, a full scale invasion war, blitzkrieg in Chicago to totally disrupt life, is absurd and impossible. These people turn off the news and go straight back to thinking about their bills and thinking about their next luxury purchase.
      But that kind of invasion can’t happen. That simply isn’t the type of enemy that exists today. There isn’t going to be some arab D-Day where they land tanks on Virginia beach and start working their way west.
      Even a nuke in a big city like Chicago….there will be black uniforms for the bears and the cubs, face book postings and everyone gets back to their shit.
      The world has gone and got itself into a Chinese finger trap where real change will never happen without catastrophe and catastrophe can’t happen because of strength.

      1. Society always has to have a nemesis. After you defeat one, another emerges or is created through propaganda.
        War stimulates the economy. Peace leads to economic depression.
        I was thinking about a conflict happening anywhere that’s been going on for some time. If they truly want to establish peace in the region, stop the weapons shipments to either side. Neither one of these third world countries has the capability to manufacture the sophisticated weapons they use against each other.
        I think the first world countries has a stock pile of obsolete weapons and has to deplete their excess inventory. They can’t use them on their own citizens so they create a conflict between 2 groups or countries who then buys the old weapons to use against one another.

        1. Not so sure with that. Sure WW2 got us out of a depression because it gave our poor economy a purpose and focus, but I don’t believe war is the only, or best, solution to a stalled (or collapsing) economy. How does sending tons of resources (men, money, supplies) out into the desert help our economy? War usually winds up being a money sink unless you stay on the sidelines selling equipment to one or both sides.

        2. I have always said that if the government wants to stop the unemployment and poverty in this country to start building large scale. FUck, doesn’t even matter if it is useless. Build the largest bridge, a building taller than the burj, fuck build pyramids….put people from unskilled workers to tradesmen to project managers and architects and logistics guys all to work for the next 20 years. Trust me, that money will move around.

        3. They tried something similar to that with the stimulus package and it did nothing. All the money was wasted paving roads that were only a couple years old. The government needs to drop taxes to the lowest possible levels and let people keep/spend their money on what they please. The problem with the government is they are not playing a 1-for-1 game. Even on welfare programs, they only give a fraction of the tax money taken in back to the people “in need.” Where’s the rest of that money go? Who the fuck knows? Nowhere productive I can tell you that much. Lot of it goes overseas. Keep the money in the pockets of the people who earned it. Then you will see economy explode (in a good way).

        4. I’ll explain how war stimulates the economy.
          You have unemployed men so you draft them to fight. This creates a labor shortage. Military need to build weapons and supplies which employs the ones not in the front lines. Citizens are under restriction to conserve and donate to the war. War puts people to work.
          In 1991 when Bush Sr. invaded Kuwait, Dow Jones Industrial shot up. At the time I couldn’t understand why. Now I do.
          Edit: In addition, after you decimated the country you’re at war with, you contract with companies to rebuild it.

        5. A few things I take issue with regarding your assessment (not malicious, just disagree).
          “You have unemployed men so you draft them to fight. This creates a labor shortage.”
          If they’re already unemployed, it’s not creating a labor shortage. To create a labor shortage you would have to take already employed citizens and throw them into military.
          “Military need to build weapons and supplies which employs the ones not in the front lines.”
          And those resources are subsequently sent overseas where a large portion are lost/destroyed. It’s not the same as a product that is created in the country and remains in the country. This example adds value to the country whereas your example is removing valuable resources from the country, hence why I call it a money sink.
          “Citizens are under restriction to conserve and donate to the war. War puts people to work.”
          I don’t think we’ve had an instance of this since WW2. No one is required to recycle their tin cans to support our troops anymore. Again, war puts people to work, but the fruits of their labor is being sent, not sold, overseas.
          I reiterate, war is a short term, but ultimately, hollow economic boost. The better option would be to sell equipment to OTHER nations who are at war like we were doing before we entered WW2.

        6. When you draft men to fight in a war, you do take them out of their current employment.
          War is not a great solution, but it is a way. I’m in no way in favor of it, but that is the way it is.

        7. Well just to argue wording for a minute, you originally made the distinction of drafting UNEMPLOYED men into the military, not employed, so that’s what I was basing that part of the argument off of. In either instance, you are paying to train and house men who are not adding value (strictly in the GDP sense) back into the economy.
          Side Note: I am not saying our soldiers are worthless with that previous statement. I am merely saying they are not producing something like a product that adds to our GDP, so no angry soldiers please. Respect.

        8. Not only that. What they do right now, works in reverse as well. In other words the burden is so high that I personally if I can’t make at least 30K more on a new job I say I don’t want it. I stay put. Reason being that after taxes and all, I’m left with about a half. So why bother for another 1K or so a month? 1K more will not improve my life in any significant way. So I say fuck it. I don’t want more so that I pay more to the government.
          They created a very high burden for people to meet if they’re looking for an increase in income. And so jobs remain unfilled and I make less than my market value. Bullshit all around.

        9. Pretty much. The USA government has created a nice and tidy little system designed to keep their slaves – I mean citizens – in perpetual debt and therefore too weak to become truly independent. The government MUST have people reliant on them in order to retain their power.

        10. Yeah. And as much as we want to think “how come they don’t see this”?.. oh yes they do. They know exactly what they’re doing. It’s by design. The government is the enemy of the economy.

        11. Is the economy THAT important? I spent part of my childhood in an island on the east coast of Africa. We didn’t have much but we never starved.

        12. Yes and no. If there was a legitimate and severe crash in the economy, many would go hungry and riots/crime would result. The reason this is the case is because America is set up on a fragile, precarious branch where a slip in any direction can spell disaster. Most people do not grow/forage/hunt for their own food, don’t walk/bike to work, and have little to no homemaking skills such as sewing/carpentry/etc. We rely on others to create those items for us. Could we live like you did on the island? Sure, but the transition would create a huge, and violent, upheaval.

        13. Maybe people should anticipate what is likely to happen anyway.
          I think reverting to a “state of nature” would eliminate useless people (trannies, faggots, SJW, banksters, etc.).

        14. ” Most people with their head out of the clouds are doing just that. I
          know that I will be tilling up some land over the winter to start
          growing crops in the spring.”
          These people may seem like a bunch of lunatics today but History is on their side.

        15. “It always boggles my mind these yuppies who don’t think they’ll ever need to defend or provide for themselves.”
          Funny you say that. The original hippie movement was about getting back to nature (among other things). Obviously, SJW only kept the marijuana part.

        16. I have never been able to fully explain the boom post WW2 in America. Your ideas of government creating an artificial labor (and goods) shortage does explain part of it.
          However, there is still the fundamental issue of the broken windows theory. As Bastiat put forth in That Which Is Seen and That Which Is Not Seen, the mere act of destroying something, while it does create an opportunity for someone to replace or repair, is a net negative to society. Otherwise, we could just go around blowing stuff up in our own country and it would lead to prosperity, which is of course silly.
          http://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window

        17. Classical liberal economic thought (non-Keynesian) teaches that peace stimulates the economy, and war leads to economic stagnation.
          At first glance, if one looks at the US, and how we have almost constantly been at war somewhere over the past 200 years, one could argue that the US, with its economic prosperity, is an example of war leading to wealth.
          But upon further analysis, the vast majority of these wars were relatively cheap endeavors (especially in terms of manpower, but also in terms of financial cost) against third world nations. I would actually argue that the US has mostly been at peace for the past 200 years, and has fought no real traditional wars to speak of (briefly entering the First and Second World Wars as they were ending, but with no real danger of defeat or invasion), and therefore the reason the US surpassed Europe over the past century was mainly due to the peace dividend. America was never invaded (briefly there was the War of 1812, but this was never a huge priority for the British and they considered it an extension of the Napoleonic Wars) and therefore America was free to expand its economy.
          On the other hand, Europe, who was the economic, political, and financial leader a century ago, lost their standing primarily due to war. Beginning in the 1800s, Europe suffered major casualties and economic damage through the Napoleonic Wars, Crimean War, Franco-Prussian War, Balkan Wars, World War I, wars of independence in Greece, Ireland, Italy, Spain, Austria, Prussia, Albania, Russia, and Finland, among others.
          World War II was the nail in the coffin for Europe. So much destruction was wreaked that they could no longer afford to keep up their empires abroad. America never faced outside invasion, and only had one civil war through its entire history. So I would argue peace is clearly more conducive to prosperity than war.

        18. If you look JUST at two stupid things that we gained nothing from: the Mideast adventurism and the bankster bailouts, the total cost so far (and this ignores the long term costs like paying hundreds of thousands vets housing, welfare, and living expenses because they are injured to the point they cannot live productive lives, and doesn’t count all the other great stuff we got like the TSA and Homeland Security) are as follows:
          ~$4 to 6 Trillion Iraq/Afghan Wars (we’ll go with the low number even though these are STILL ongoing)
          http://time.com/3651697/afghanistan-war-cost/
          $2.5 trillion in bailouts
          http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/02/04/business/20090205-bailout-totals-graphic.html
          There are 115 million households in America. Imagine what things would be like if each household received a check for $56,522, Saddam Hussein was still in power, and ISIS didn’t exist. Not *quite* enough for EVERY HOUSEHOLD IN AMERICA to buy a yacht, but pretty damn close!
          When you look at the numbers this way, and imagine that Uncle Sam could have just delivered a brand new BMW M3 to EVERY HOUSEHOLD IN AMERICA for the same price as wasting it on bankers and killing people, it really begins to boggle the mind.

        19. I don’t believe there was much of the US stimulus directed towards physical projects. I recall reading at the time it was in the single digit percentages. Meanwhile, China did launch a smaller stimulus where almost all the money was to be used for high speed rail, highways, telephone and internet connectivity, etc., things that are currently benefitting their population, while ours typically was the equivalent of popping a Viagra, giving a temporary one shot boost.
          Where America *DID* try this was FDR’s New Deal and WPA. There are still huge projects we are continuing to benefit from today, including major bridges and viaducts in my town and hundreds of others throughout the nation, the Hoover Dam, LaGuardia Airport, etc.

        20. The ‘new deal’ didn’t work. It was all smoke and mirrors and public relations. FDR was too completely random and caused far more damage than help though he ‘appeared’ to help.
          Nothing wrong with a stimulus but it was the way he went about it. I read or rather listened to “FDR’s Folly: How Roosevelt and His New Deal Prolonged the Great Depression” by Jim Powell.
          FDR was a totally crap economist, I don’t think any economist would disagree. Even the dams are regarded as likely as not as being an economic failure.
          “Admirers of FDR credit his New Deal with restoring the American economy after the disastrous contraction of 1929—33. Truth to tell–as Powell demonstrates without a shadow of a doubt–the New Deal hampered recovery from the contraction, prolonged and added to unemployment, and set the stage for ever more intrusive and costly government. Powell’s analysis is thoroughly documented, relying on an impressive variety of popular and academic literature both contemporary and historical.”
          –Milton Friedman, Nobel Laureate, Hoover Institution
          “There is a critical and often forgotten difference between disaster and tragedy. Disasters happen to us all, no matter what we do. Tragedies are brought upon ourselves by hubris. The Depression of the 1930s would have been a brief disaster if it hadn’t been for the national tragedy of the New Deal. Jim Powell has proven this.”
          –P.J. O’Rourke, author of Parliament of Whores and Eat the Rich
          “The material laid out in this book desperately needs to be available to a much wider audience than the ranks of professional economists and economic historians, if policy confusion similar to the New Deal is to be avoided in the future.”
          –James M. Buchanan, Nobel Laureate, George Mason University
          “I found Jim Powell’s book fascinating. I think he has written an important story, one that definitely needs telling.”
          –Thomas Fleming, author of The New Dealers’ War
          “Jim Powell is one tough-minded historian, willing to let the chips fall where they may. That’s a rare quality these days, hence more valuable than ever. He lets the history do the talking.”
          –David Landes, Professor of History Emeritus, Harvard University
          “Jim Powell draws together voluminous economic research on the effects of all of Roosevelt’s major policies. Along the way, Powell gives fascinating thumbnail sketches of the major players. The result is a devastating indictment, compellingly told. Those who think that government intervention helped get the U.S. economy out of the depression should read this book.”
          –David R. Henderson, editor of The Fortune Encyclopedia of Economics and author of The Joy of Freedom

        21. Interesting you brought up the broken window theory. I’ve now recalled reading about it.
          One thing about that theory is that debt was not included. It assumes that you had the money (captial) on hand that could’ve been used for something else like investing in new technology. When you have no money to invest or you just sit on that money and did nothing with it, the economy stagnates.
          It’s much easier for the government to conjure up an enemy and have a nation of uninformed drones to be emotionally riled up to go to war against this false enemy so we can borrow money easily than to convince the public of borrowing money to invest in a new technology with unknown results if any. The general public is just too ignorant to understand the complexity of the technology, but they can easily understand the threat of a violent enemy.

        22. Regardless of whether the New Deal was the best use of those resources, it is a stark example compared to how our politicians waste resources today. Maybe they grossly overpaid for the bridges and dams, maybe they were built inefficiently with a lot of labor, but I will point out two things: (1) They were built well–much of those projects are still around almost 100 years later and (2) we have roads, bridges, dams, etc. today that are providing some utility to society for multiple generations, through today.
          Contrast that with the trillions blown in the Mideast, which was the equivalent of lighting hundred dollar bills on fire… no, actually, it’s worse, because the American taxpayer was robbed to pay for military expenditure in a foreign nation, and then now many of those very expenditures, the Humvees, the missles, the weapon, are being used by ISIS against western interests. If most government spending is wasteful, I will always choose the spending that has *some* return over the spending with no return (or in the case of the Mideast, a negative return via blowback).

        23. I’m not sure I understand the implication of debt in the broken windows theory. And the theory doesn’t require that the expenditure be on anything groundbreaking like investing in new technology; actually in the example given, the choice is between repairing a broken window and buying a new pair of shoes. Between wasting money on something that was already paid for once, and obtaining a new product or service.
          Think of it this way, if economic activity and prosperity is measured by the amount of goods and services created or consumed in a year in a society, repairing a broken window shows zero net change–you began and ended the year with one window. While a new pair of shoes represents creation of a new item which now enters into the inventory of all items in an economy. In other words one window plus one pair of shoes.

        24. I see where you’re coming from. The broken window pane idea is valid IF that money was to be spent on something. Spending money is what drives the economy. Saving money hinders economy. I don’t mean saving money in a bank account where banks lend that money out to be spent.
          This is why America’s economy is chugging along. We spend, even with money we don’t have, thus going into debt. All our economic policies encourage spending and discourage savings. Japan has a saving culture and they’ve not had much economic growth for a couple of decades now. They even encourage spending.
          Now, building up for a war will spark new spending. Lots of it, and that is why I say war stimulates the economy.

        25. Well, first I would ask what you mean by those terms, because they are often misused. Inflation is often used to refer either to a diluted money supply or a rise in the average price level.
          Secondly I would say that deflation (either definition) has never happened since America was completely removed from the gold standard, so hypothesizing would be necessary.

        26. In general I agree. Money does have to be used wisely and productively. The worst case is borrowing money and throwing it away to build a useless project. Typical might be airports or roads no one wants to use or as you pointed out foreign wars.

        27. That’s how I would define those 2 terms.
          A steady inflation is needed for the economy. Deflation, although sounds great for the average Joe, is actually bad for the economy. I’ll elaborate.
          If you knew the price of something you need/want was going to increase the next day, you would make that purchase now to avoid the price increase. Kind of like buying it before the sale ends. This allows money to flow. Retailers can pay employee wages and then buy more inventory to sell to make profits.
          On the flip side, deflation, if you knew the price of an item you need/want will drop the next day or so, you will wait until then to buy. No money flows. Economy is stagnant. Retailers can’t pay employees or will need to lay off staff. People have no jobs and can’t buy things. Retailers do not buy new inventory because he hasn’t sold what he has. Factories slows down and lays off more people. It’s not a pretty picture.
          So thinking your money buys more in a deflation sounds great if you have savings, but it really hurts the economy.

        28. Wait, so you are choosing *both* definitions? I was expecting you to pick one. The reason the definition of the word is important is because one is a system-wide phenomenon caused by government diluting the currency (basically just stealing a very little bit from everyone in society, in other words just taxing them) and the other could be caused by numerous other factors, but is the result of market prices adjusting naturally to supply and demand.
          http://www.incrementum.li/en/austrian-school-of-economics/monetary-inflation-versus-price-inflation/
          As seen in the maps above, we have seen nothing but inflation–and strong inflation since Bretton Woods in 1972, so any talk of deflation is sort of like talking of depopulation–easy to scare people with dangerous scenarios, but when all evidence is pointing in the other direction it’s just wild speculation.
          http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Stefan-Karlsson/2013/0521/How-monetary-inflation-leads-to-consumer-price-inflation

      2. Religion (at least the Abrahamic ones) is more about giving man a purpose that is greater than himself. It does not extinguish lifes passion it pushes and directs it. But what modern dept based materialize has done to us is tragic

        1. I disagree about religion…but even given you are correct, the point about modern consumerism creating a situation where true revolution is impossible stands.

        2. bingo…only now it is even more ubiquitous and unbeatable “debt and circus”
          Turns out, people like debt more than food.

        3. Disagreement is a good thing. But your point about enslaving yourself by why of materialism that leads to dept. “The rich rule over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender” Seems religion agrees with you on that

        4. plenty of intersecting points of agreement between me and many religions…I don’t want to go down the immature “religion is dumb and religion people is dumb too” road. That simply isn’t true.
          However, I don’t think that the rich ruling over the poor and the borrower being servant to the lender really encapsulates what is going on. Granted, it probably encapsulated the issue from the time it was thought up and that thinking lasted an unprecedented amount of time being relevant, but it has become more complicated. Each individual has become the rich and the poor and the borrower and the lender all in one. Modernity has complicated the fuck out of the traditional binary structure. I don’t have all the answers. In fact, I don’t have any of the answers. However, if there is a good place to start it would be “people need to stop being such cunts”

        5. I see that simple truth “borrower as slave to lender” as something we all need to keep in mind. Our credit line is selling our future earnings at a big discount. More and more of our time spent working, becomes working without any pay going to you. A loan is indentured servitude. They may not whip you anymore, but it can get hard to eat well or have a life outside of work. That is punishment enough to keep you in line. Doing what you are told to do, instead of what you want to do.
          Talking about it, that helps us all find answers. That is the way I see it. If I’m always agreed with, I’m not learning shit am I? Keep disagreeing, it does me good. I’m not lacking in self confidence. My ego needs deflating on occasion.

        6. Nothing you say here is wrong, but remember….most of these debts aren’t created for the survival of the debtor and/or his family. The debt is created internally by the drive for luxury, for status. A liberal arts college degree? That’s just a toupee wearing a rolex. It is as useful as an ejector seat on a helicopter.
          The impoverished people I am thinking about aren’t the filthy bums who eat my garbage. They aren’t even the poor schmucks who lose their homes.
          It is the people with a house and a car and two kids in college and they are both at wok and the kids have new iphones and blah and blah and blah.
          At any point all of this could have been avoided if they just stepped the fuck back and said no…this is bullshit.
          Of course there is manipulation of the stupid for profit, people lending money for slavery but, and this is what makes our world interesting compared to and older world, it is the borrowers who are now leading the circus. They are their own slave masters.They don’t just accept slavery. They fucking demand it. Hell, I am guilty. And the more they make the more they spend so making 300k a year is only better than making 50k a year by the quality of the shackles.
          I honestly feel that the traditional slave master, the traditional lender, or king or whatever has been totally replaced by a web of slaves enslaving themselves.
          The world and the slavery is all an illusion and that illusion seems to be propped up by the slaves themselves. They kings of old got to withdraw and totally disappear while everyone is a slave to no one and if given a choice, if given a cash amount twice what they are indebted for, would, without hesitation, immediately dive even deeper in than crawl out and that is what makes the modern slave the most interesting slave ever.
          Cut the slaves shackles and he will go off in search of bigger fucking shackles!

        7. Thanks man. I don’t even mean to out of hand dismiss the wisdom found in religion but it is wisdom for a much different time. I am sure it represented the best ideas of the time, but those toga wearing mother fuckers couldn’t possibly understand this world and while the core ideals may be good they are hopelessly irrelevant in our modern world. The problems got more sophisticated so, while we may not need to abandon the values, we do need to reconsider the details with things like the kardashianism of the world, instant communication, money no longer being real, power being dispersed etc etc etc

        8. it’s funny, I saw some meme somewhere but it basically said that there are like a billion adobe acrobat updates and he still hasn’t noticed anything different since the first time he used it a decade ago.
          It made me think. God damn world is moving so fast that you need weekly updates just to stay relevant, let alone advance in any way.

        9. “I honestly feel that the traditional slave master, the traditional
          lender, or king or whatever has been totally replaced by a web of slaves enslaving themselves.”
          Fiat money made chattel slavery obsolete. If men were paid in say pre-1965 (post JFK) coins, then it wouldn’t take two incomes to provide for a family like one man could previously. If the government had never gotten into providing the free babysitting (“education”) business then both incomes wouldn’t even be possible, which wouldn’t have allowed government taxation levels requiring two incomes, etc.

        10. perfectly correct. problem is…all that stuff did happen so the old ideas for how to solve things have all been rendered obsolete. Religion, morality, all that shit was based on a world that understood chattel slavery. Everyone was a slave, even the king was a slave to god. Without this paradigm then the solution and morality are worth less than fortune cookies.

        11. I think the rampant consumerism is caused by the central tenet of modern society: that all people are equal. If we are all equal (in terms of intelligence, abilities, worth, potential), then it follows that the only way to distinguish oneself is through the acquisition and accumulation of things. When you know you are superior to the vast majority of humans (bugs), you don’t feel compelled to prove it. Believing people are not born inherently better or worse drives the economy.

        12. Equal yet superior, the American way. Lol
          While I don’t think it can all be boiled down to a single cause, you definitely nail the head on one of, if not the major one

        13. “…It is the people with a house and a car and two kids in college”.
          Increasingly the children are not part of the equation. They are just too expensive.

    3. What neoreactionary movement in the techno-nerd community? I’d love to see it if it’s there but have the worried feeling that hackers and hard-core programmers unfortunately more left than right are.. Please post a link to some conservative cyberactivists would like to check it out if it exists..

  3. The thing with violence is nothing will seem to happen. Until there is an outbreak of genocidal violence as if out of nowhere.

  4. If Islam eats the traitors. Then some lessons can be learned from them. Of how they were able to deal with the NSA and the 5 eyes etc.

  5. The last new bullshit from those leftist in France : To show
    “resistance”, tonight people will hold hands together at 9:20pm
    (because, the first gunshot was fired at this moment) and show their
    pics to facebook instagram and all shitty social networks with the
    hashtag #maindanslamain (literally : holding hands)
    This,
    gentlemen, is the worst bullshit I’ve ever seen in my country. people
    are not able to show anger, no. All of them are just weak sheep with a
    fucking disgusting hippy mindstate.

      1. yeah, they live in constant denial of the harsh reality and fell really superior about that. And they are proud to show this on social networks. I think it’s pathological.

    1. The only activists who ever put their money where they mouth were those in Tienanmen Square. The rest are a bunch of bandwaggoners who seldom know anything behind their ’cause’.

        1. And they died for a cause worth fighting for. Unlike the bruised egos of sheltered american college children.

        2. I have a more jaded view of the American Revolution. However, it seems to be established fact that if the French did not take such delight in messing with the British back in the day, the Americans would not have had a chance.

        3. Read the last eight words in the last paragraph of the Declaration of Independence.
          Get back to me about that. I’ll be happy to discuss it with you.

        4. Id say you are partially correct in your assertion due to the french providing artillery and naval assistance. The American Revolution really occurs in two distinct revolts. There is the traditional army fighting along the coasts which did greatly benefit from French intervention. The second is on the periphery consisting of guerrilla warfare that would have gone on for years with eventual British defeat by attrition barring a Cromwell-esque response. This secondary front just wanted to be left alone and elements took on Washington later in the “Whiskey Rebellion”.

        5. My point is that if the French did not tie up the British army, the Americans would not have stood a chance. The British regulars were the best soldiers on the planet at the time. A couple boat loads would have put down that insurrection in quick order.
          .
          The motivations behind the American Revolution are a whole other box of cereal.

        6. I’m not sure exactly where they tied up the British army. France had just come off a serious defeat in the French and Indian War.

        7. If I recall they were messing with them on the high seas so the British could not send troops over to put down the revolution.

      1. ouais carrément. Napoléon, Charlemagne et charles martel doivent en faire des saltos arrières dans leurs tombes !

    2. Stay safe over there. I would seriously consider getting the hell out of there unless you plan on staying to fight back. I’ve seen videos where these people are swarming in like locusts. I highly doubt there’s any turning back at this point unless the citizens and army team up to violently drive them out.

      1. Yeah, I doubt it. I’m waiting for the election in december to see if the right wing could get stronger with those recent events. If it’s the case, I’ll wait for the next president election. On the contrary, i’ll plan to leave this country which is drowning in it’s own ideological bullshit.

        1. Unabashed… America is not in a better position…..Maybe after the Pres. Election ?? But to tell you the TRUTH, I’m not holding my breath…. The tiny, very tiny, flicker of light that give me some hope, is that you are armed & since your, narcissistic beloved President got elected, gun sales in America went through the roof…

    3. In the meantime, ISIL killed 27 people in Mali.
      A bunch of blue haired SJW is definitely gonna scare the shit out of them.

        1. Haha I didn’t know about this. Yeah! That’s definitely the spirit.
          By the way, I stand corrected. We don’t know for sure if ISIL perpetrated the Mali attack. It may be Al-Qaeda after all.
          These guys are using France’s backyard to see who has the bigger stick.

        2. I think if the Europeans of the 19th century could see what has happened to their countries, they would have elected to stay put and would not have set out to create far flung empires in Africa and the Middle East. The refugee influx and the attacks are the continuing legacy of colonialism. In the end, was cheap rubber and tea really worth it?

        3. Well they could have taken their rubber and their cheap oil without “civilizing” Africans, i.e. destryoing their traditional tribal lifestyle. Hunter gatherers tribes would have been no threat to Europe.
          The problem is that people never learn and the West will keep pushing for “democracy” and “human rights”, which actually are a Trojan horse for the Bankster system.

        4. They certainly would have done things differently.
          Allowing so much immigration so poorly chosen into the west was the problem, fake guilt about colonialism is the problem.
          Immigration is happening into countries such as Iceland, Norway and Sweden and Finland. Its the Fricken communists that run the UN.
          Africa was riven with black on black slavery, most of the so called African civilisations, those with cities were built on slavery and had become Muslim due to Arab influence. It was the British that stopped it by blockading the entire continent of Africa to prevent the trade of slaves by both Spanish, US and Arabs.
          The Arabs castrated most male slaves.
          Sth America was also riven with Indian on Indian slavery.

    4. Yes, because THIS is what will show them you mean business! Holding hands, singing the coke song and lighting candles.
      I miss the days were having balls was something people respected and EXPECTED (of men). This pillow biting attitude of ‘showing peace in times of war’ is some twisted hippie logic that takes the turn the other cheek idea too far. Even Jesus had enough and got up in peoples grill. The only problem is that people live in fear now and want to be coddled. I don’t. I don’t care if my plane blows up or I die tomorrow at least I didn’t let some kids scare me into doing what they want.
      What happened to taking the anti-bully mentality to the terrorists? I am NOT going to let you ruin my life, my idea of freedom, and I am NOT going to live in fear of you and your kind – PERIOD.

      1. I get it, the ROK readership likes to bitch about the world, because very little in the world is going right, and I agree. But come on, is this really a problem? The people of Paris want to get together and feel some brotherhood and show the world that they are not afraid, they are still going to live their lives, and not give in to demands of terrorists.
        What would you recommend they do instead? All get out their AK47s and shoot them into the air and start yelling, like the other side does? That wouldn’t intimidate anyone, it would likely only escalate things.
        I have no idea what the correct response should be to these attacks, primarily because they weren’t logical in any way, so it is difficult to come up with an idea that works. Military retaliation will definitely be part of the solution, and that is already underway. If Parisians want to help out with that part, go sign up for the military (many are). I agree that the attacks anger me, and I would want to show that anger as well. But not everyone will want to react that way, and frankly, a public showing of anger doesn’t accomplish anything any more than burning a candle does. It only helps that person feel better, which is all this is about.
        Basically, I’m saying let people express their frustration and emotions in whatever way helps them–through anger, through solidarity with others, through candlelight vigils, through marches and chants. They are just trying to express their emotions after a traumatic and awful event, and just because I wouldn’t react that way I’m not going to criticize others for how they want to come together.

      2. Singing…..
        Kumbaya my Lord, kumbaya
        Kumbaya my Lord, kumbaya
        Kumbaya my Lord, kumbaya
        Oh Lord, kumbaya Kumbaya my Lord, kumbaya
        Kumbaya my Lord, kumbaya
        Kumbaya my Lord, kumbaya
        Oh Lord, kumbaya
        Yupp…….

    5. It is worth noting that Paris is a super left wing city. Putting San Fran and maybe even Stockholm to shame.

      1. As a Frenchman, I am ashamed to say the it’s not only Left-Wing Trotskyist City, but it’s as well the “Gay Paris”…………..

      2. yes it is super left wing, so is the entire country too. It’s not a surprise France has became such a weak nation, which just rely on relationship with others (stronger) countries.

        1. faraway2 Super left-wing (Trotskyist) only among the “so called” intelligentsia & nomenklatura… Ordinary working people are actually more conservative…
          Unluckily they are not the ruler….

        2. I’m waiting for elections in december and in 2017. Perhaps, there will be a change.. I bet on the beginning of the rise of nationalisms in europe.

  6. I really enjoy these discussions and I hope you do them more often. As for your last point about being unable to enjoy contemporary films, I have noticed that with myself as well. Either I am bored out of my mind or my mind rejects the messages presented, like white blood cells rejecting a known threat.

  7. The most common mainstream argument I’ve seen around my parts is that “If you are anti [mass] immigration, you are pro-ISIS because you are stirring racial tensions that can lead to a war.”.
    While I cannot support violence against Muslims on grounds of what these fanatics are doing, I don’t agree that wanting to limit the amount of immigration in order to ensure the preservation of the native Western culture (especially in Europe) is pro-ISIS.

    1. It’s a pathetic leftist bait and switch tactic they use all the time:
      You don’t believe in abortion? You must hate women!
      You don’t believe in welfare? You must hate blacks!
      You don’t believe in mass immigration? You must be a bigot!
      Everything is opposite ends of the spectrum with them. There’s no middle ground approach. It’s all or nothing.

      1. Yeah, to paraphrase someone else’ analysis of their tactics: “They will always accuse you of what they themselves are guilty of doing…”

    2. Do a quick search of berni sanders claiming terror is caused by global warming…mind blowing…since the west creates most of the emissions, we caused the mess in the mid east…imagine if bernie won ??

    3. It’s a classic case of providing solutions for the wrong problem. Yes, most of the refugees are opposed to ISIS and that’s why they are fleeing in the first place.
      What typically happens is during a period of conflict, people will flee war zone areas, often to adjacent countries to escape the devastation and destruction. That’s entirely different than packing up all your shit, hopping on a plane, flying to somewhere 3,000 miles away and permanently living there.
      Temporary asylum should be granted to refugees in the immediate area surrounding Syria–I wouldn’t even mind taxpayer resources to be used to help pay for the refugee camps for those fleeing the war–and the attention should be focused on how to stop the refugees. The only one working to achieve this is Putin by attacking ISIS rebels and attempting to restore the Assad regime. But America, as always, is on the wrong side of this conflict and wants Assad, the enemy of ISIS, to be overthrown. (For who, exactly, to be put in charge, I would like to know!?)
      Kudos to Russia and it looks like maybe France for looking to actually solve this problem instead of diverting it.
      The same happens with the environment. All the efforts towards clean environment are directed towards carbon. Not chemicals in the air or water, but carbon and carbon dioxide. It’s always a discussion about climate change and carbon, never about chemicals or pollutants or sewage or industrial waste, which are the more important items affecting our environment. But misdirect, and provide a solution to a different problem, and the sheeple fall in line.

  8. Hoping someone here can explain a few things for me that I see repeated ad nauseum in the Manoshpere. To me they sound like conspiracy theories with no evidence backing them up but I’m open to changing my mind if someone can lay it out for me….
    1. It’s all the jews fault. The jews are trying to fuck white people over.
    I get that jews occupy a significant amount of powerful positions in the media, hollywood, finance, etc. but in the manosphere they’re made out to be people who sit around a table together discussing ways to tear down the white man (I’m white by the way) and corrupt their civilization. I just don’t see it. Tearing down the white man’s world would and will negatively impact their own lives and I’m sure they know that. Why would jews want to surround themselves by Muslims, for example?
    2. The “elites” are out to control and manipulate the population under them to retain and increase their power.
    Again, the Manosphere makes it seem like these elites sit around a table discussing the way in which they can control the population through immigration, feminism, homosexuality, insert any left-wing social construct. Who are these elites?? Can someone point out one example of an actual person who has been caught actively trying to control or increase their power through overt manipulation of their native population? Does Barack Obama sit around a table with corporate executives and other politicians discussing how they can control and manipulate the population to retain power? I just don’t see it. I’ve never seen even one example of it.
    The state that we find ourselves has been a progression over many years. First, allowing women to vote. Then allowing more and more immigrants to boost economies. Then sexual liberation. Then more and more progressive policies the more prosperous the nation has become. None of these things were done as a conspiracy. They seemed like the right thing to do by the majority of the population at that time.
    I even heard Roosh bring up “the fluoride conspiracy”. Roosh is leaning more and more towards conspiracies every day. So please, explain to me how this fluoride thing works. I’ve heard it’s to calcify your pineal gland as to not release natural occurring DMT so you won’t become more independently thinking and more questioning of “the elites”, or to decrease testosterone to castrate the male population. So again, who are these people sitting around a table discussing putting fluoride in the water as a means to control the population? Am I the only sane person in the manosphere that thinks this sounds ridiculous? At some point, wouldn’t some information leak out about this, in this day in age?

    1. I have a degree of sympathy for many of the points you mention. When you critically examine in a dispassionate manner most of the claims made by conspiracy theorists, they’re in the majority, made on premises that lack any substantive evidence. This “evidence vacuum” propagates and feeds the whole wild speculative trend that ascribes motives to the “Elites” “Jews” “Soviets” “White Supremacists” “Jesuits” “Freemasons” as the group or groups that have unleashed their diabolic plans upon us all.
      However as you say the problem with conspiracy theories is that (a) They lack any foundation evidence that supports what they purport (2) The fact that so little information from these theories has ever leaked out, even with wilkleaks, what transpired from the heart of the “secret government” doesn’t support any of what’s stated in most of these theories (apart from the oil in the middle east rationale to invade Iraqi which everyone knew anyway) (c) They’re an appeal to a form of irrationalism akin to the superstitious and medieval mindset that sees all types of otherwise ordinary behavior as being marks of the devil, this is for example what happened in Salem when rational, mature men were taken in by the hysteria of the collective immature female mind that had innocents condemned to death as witches. (d) Lastly, I really don’t think the human race are smart enough to organize such a wide scale global conspiracy. Besides we’re left asking the question- Who the hell would want to rule the world anyway, sure, certain groups might want to get rich, but, that’s not the same as wanting to rule and take over the entire human race. What would be the purpose of doing this?
      Ultimately such theories are as credible as Roswell and the Loch Ness monster, sure they might possibly exist, and even if they do, we’re still left scratching our heads, asking the question which Enrico Fermi asked about UFOS “Where are they?”.

    2. I am not part of any high level elitist meetings, so I have no idea what goes on there. I do know that the elites do get together en masse at places like Jackson Hole, Camp David, Bohemian Grove, Bilderburg Meetings, but they could be discussing helpful ideas, destructive ones, or just simply what kind of brandy they enjoy.
      So I do not attempt to assign motives or come up with grand conspiracies. I can only look at the actions and their effects. Fluoride, for instance, is a dangerous chemical, a byproduct of the aluminum industry, and is not meant, nor fit, for human consumption beyond the normal trace amounts found in nature (even radiation is found in nature; this does not mean it is “good” for you).
      Fluoride toothpaste has a warning to call poison control if you ingest too much of it. Fluoride is banned in most of Europe and the first world. The Nazis and Soviet Gulag directors believed it made prisoners more docile and it was added to water supplies. But it is used in about 2/3 of the USA.
      The only positive factor attributed to fluoride is for topical use. The idea that fluoride defenders use is that we need to splash more fluoride on our teeth to prevent cavities, and so the best way to do that is add it to water so that as people drink water, it briefly passes over the teeth and exposes them to fluoride. If fluoride were that potent, imagine what ingesting it would do to your insides. There is zero medical benefit ever attributed to ingesting fluoride.
      On the contrary, there is considerable evidence that it is dangerous and even going off its proponent’s arguments, it is clearly unnecessary. If we need more fluoride on our teeth, then educate people on regular brushing, mandate it be put in all toothpastes, pass out government toothpaste, anything but don’t add it to the drinking water!
      I don’t know or care if it’s a conspiracy. I’m more likely to think that people just go with the status quo and the city water plant administrator probably feels like you do–doesn’t really know much about fluoride but it can’t be bad for you if the government mandates it, right?
      Maybe David Rockefeller gave billions of dollars to the feds to implement some mass fluoride poisoning to dumb us all down, maybe the government just likes having a dumb population and mandates usage, maybe the aluminum industry uses it as a way to make money off an otherwise dangerous and unwanted byproduct, maybe it’s just inertia taking a long time to kill off a bad idea. I could spend years trying to investigate or research why, or I could just purchase a filter to get rid of the poisonous stuff and not worry about it any longer, which I have done. I think about it the same way I think about male genital mutilation aka circumcision–a bad idea that has not yet died.

      1. I have no doubt the fluoride in the drinking water has some effect on our endocrine system, but the question is how much? And does it outweigh the good it’s doing by preventing cavities.
        This is anecdotal, but my brother in-law lives in one of the few Canadian cities (Collingwood, ON) that doesn’t have fluoride in the water and he said after moving there is mouth exploded in cavities. I brought up the fluoride conspiracy with him and my sister (both doctors!) and they just laughed at it. It’s not a fucking conspiracy! Fluoride was put in the water to serve a purpose at one time (reducing cavities). Maybe now it should be further investigated for potential negative effects, but don’t you think that’s already been done? Can you point me to any research that backs up what you’re saying about how harmful it is?

        1. The investigation has been done, which is why most societies around the planet removed fluoride. And if you need fluoride to clean your teeth, the solution is to rub it onto your teeth in paste form, using a device designed precisely for that purpose: a toothbruth. I can guarantee rubbing the fluoride in the teeth for 30 seconds with applying force to the bristles twice a day will do exponentially more for your teeth than letting a gallon of fluoridated water briefly run across your throat. When you go to the dentist, they apply an even stronger solution of fluoride with even more force–using that special paste with the electric tool and then tell you not to eat or drink for 30 minutes? Hmm if water washes away fluoride it can’t be doing much good to put it in the water supply can it?
          I’m sure you can google multiple studies if you want. The only one I know off the top of my head is a Harvard study that was done in the past decade that shows Fluoridated water was proven to lower IQ 7 points. There are links to other studies in the article if you want to research it more. Also the EPA scientists determined fluoridated water was an “unreasonable risk” about a decade ago. Even if that’s all you knew, would you want to take something that can lower your IQ 7 points when the alternative is remembering to brush your teeth?
          http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/02/harvard-study-published-national-institute-health-journal-finds-fluoride-lowers-childrens-intelligence-7-iq-points.html
          http://fluoridealert.org/studies/brain01/

      2. These are dentist’s pics from New Zealand school age white kids who were overdosed with mandatory fluoride treatment presumably in the late 80’s. Overdosing results in dental fluorosis. It’s toxic and results in a wide spectre of health problems associated. I can remember in the US some school kids having the characteristeric scaly mottled look to the teeth years back but we didn’t know it was fluorosis. The New zealand kids got smacked with pretty severe fluoride ‘treatment’.
        http://fluoridation.com/images/teeth8.jpg
        http://medya.todayszaman.com/todayszaman/upload/image/2014/fluorosis1.jpg
        http://fluoridation.com/images/teeth6.jpg
        https://www.healthychildren.org/SiteCollectionImages/what_is_fluorosis.jpg
        http://www.fluoridealert.org/uploads/colquhoun.jpg
        .

        1. I actually have mild to moderate fluorosis because my parents were told to give me drops of fluoride on my teeth as a child. And a circumcised schlong, despite not being Jewish. No hard feelings against the parents, but WTF!

    3. If you don’t get it yet, you just haven’t been paying attention. Or maybe you are nowhere near as smart, or grounded in reality and knowledge as you would like to think. You either haven’t or can’t see the big picture. For those of us who can it’s basically obvious at this point. You live in a capitalist, private property based society fast becoming an oligarchy/monopoly backed Tyranny. The media is not an organic coming together of peoples, Everything is a handing down from the few to the many. The news reporters don’t go into work and decide what the news is. Most(jewish or otherwise) are working for money, some for ideology, some are being set-up or straight up lied to, but there is never any shortage of “useful idiots”. You are going to have to embark on a journey of learning and self belief if you truly wish to understand. Where to begin? definitely NOT fluoride, that is a pretty trivial aspect of the open conspiracy, that even an Alex jones doesn’t focus on much, and even then only to sell supplements and water filters. It certainly doesn’t need to be proven one way or the other.
      First and foremost
      1. The greatest evidence is the fact that much of what is happening in the world has been predicted and opposed in advance. From the Russian revolution, From the writings of Adolf Hitler, the word of soviet defectors, to the predictions of an Alex Jones type character. There is no way someone could listen to the Alex jones show everyday for 15 years for instance, whilst also following mainstream news, and not know that all this stuff real. And whilst many believe him to be a shill, so much has been predicted that the only people who can call him crazy at this point are people who haven’t been paying attention. It wasn’t always like this even in the manosphere, It has become this way because more and more has come to pass, and the narratives have fallen apart. Actually listen to the interviews Roosh mentioned with Yuri Bezmenov, he explains, the soviets were never a military, economic or infiltrative threat to the USA. The USA was already infiltrate from the beginning, the KGB was in reality practising social, government, military, economic and civilizational engineering on their own people and others around the world, so that knowledge could be passed to collaborators in the USA to be used and implemented.
      2. There is nothing to “prove” as such, you live in a society that is X, Y, Z. And it is that way for a reason, a man made and engineered reason. It is not some immutable or natural law that it is to be like this, something that needs to be proven and accepted like the shape of the earth or the existence of the Atom. This is why the social engineers have a massive headstart on humanity, there is no real way that society, culture, government, the economy etc IS or SHOULD be, that isn’t decided in the minds of influential men. At some point you have to have your own ideas of how things should/could be, rather than buying into consensus or authority, which is logically fallacious, you must develop your own idea of truth, or your own understanding of it.
      You could deny that the earth is a sphere, unless someone jetted you into space so you could look down on it, and even then, question your own eyes, but then how would we ever be able to come to logical conclusions about ANYTHING?? The sheer amount of Time, money and energy required to prove that fact to you would be insane, how could we prove it to everyone? And what would be the benefit? There is faith, quite rightly, in all things, including oneself and ones ability to look down from above(not literally), and have faith in what one is seeing. Did you see Hitler Gas 6 Million jews? Did you see him sitting around a table planning it? why do you question some things more than others? I don’t understand why you need to see people sitting round a table…..fluoride really is bad for you, it really is well known, it really is still being added to the water….be mad about it…..and many other things.
      So Where to begin? It’s safe to say where to begin is a close study of the history and implications of our monetary system. Shouldn’t money be created as value only? By the government of the people, and be distributed for the good of the people?
      No debt, No taxes, No Austerity?
      Isn’t it in reality a corrupt, criminal practice that it can be even possible for your government to be in debt?
      The answer to the questions I just posed is an objective and unequivocal YES, if you can’t conceive a world outside the modern financial system, that is YOUR failure, not the failure of anyone else to prove it to you.
      It’s also important to understand where to “End”, A World Government. Understand this Endgame and how Money, Wars, Social engineering and upheaval are being used to achieve this end, and everything falls into place. Democracy and the left wing dumbing down agenda is just a tool amongst many to achieve these ends. To marginalise nationalism and males, the natural defence and leaders of a society, and appeal to the lowest common denominators. Why are certain things up for vote in the first place? Certainly no one where I am from voted for the EU, mass immigration, free movement, Syrian refugees. That was never explicitly put to a vote.
      There isn’t time for everything to be proven to everyone to whatever imaginary standard everyone believes that they have, there isn’t even time for consensus, there is only time for men to take action.
      Societal+governmental Change and revolution itself is always the preserve of the few who know better, have vision and take action from a position of greater knowledge, means and abilty. For better or worse.

    4. Prove there are people sitting around a table generating “conspiracy thoeries”(which in reality is just one conspiracy theory) based just enough on reality to appear to the intelligent mind to be real, but actually not. Prove that people invented a crazy “conspiracy theory” decades and decades ago and kept banging on about it for years and years just so a small segment of critical thinking people would believe in them years from then….when it’s proven correct
      In reality there is only one conspiracy, the central banking(and “democracy”) based world government conspiracy and the various methods they choose to attain that objective, that is only achieving credibility in the eyes of a significant minority NOW, because actually it is real and coming to fruition more and more, day by day, and having real observable negative consequences that people are taking note of…..
      Then actually you find that your theory is less believable than the “conspiracy theories”. The conspiracy is open now, all you can be is one of the dumbed down degenerates who like and go along with it…..or a conspiracy theorist….
      Eventually the cat is out of the bag and won’t go back in. See my other comment.

        1. I’m sorry is this a response to me, or left here for someone else? because I don’t see any comments in this section that agree with your type of weak BS. Lucky I don’t buy into consensus = Truth/reality BS that you do, I was a “conspiracy theorist” before Roosh or anyone else thought it was cool. You’re lucky I even took the time to respond to your comment. You certainly don’t require debunking or proving anything to.
          Pretty obvious why the conspiracy is real. Without strong leaders and accurate information reinforced constantly in an almost propaganda like manner, people revert to weak, mediocre scum like you who couldn’t see a threat or assess real information if your life depended on it.
          Just admit it, you aren’t a real person, you can’t face up to the truth of your own helplessness in the face of a threat, can’t face up to being a dupe for most of your long pointless life, can’t face up to all of this basically being above your head, can’t face up to your plan A. B and C in the face of a threat being crawling into hole and dying…..Like those frenchies who run around like headless chickens when they hear a loud noise and think flowers will save them, instead of demanding an explanation for why they are weak unarmed pussies and their country is full of Muzzies. No I’m sorry my friend, it all requires an explanation. At some point you just have to say enough is enough, our “leaders”(and I seriously question whether they have any power at all at this point) are not behaving at all like they have good will towards their people. They aren’t behaving like real leaders or real people full stop. It’s as simple as that. Even if you were right, that it’s all some big accident, the complete degeneration and overrunning of western Europe, the people should STILL be out in the street taking their country back, so I hope you aren’t holding onto your denial as an excuse for being a complete pussy or armchair conservative as things degenerate, because there really are people out there want to kill your ass, your civilization really is under threat.

        2. You talk and talk and talk, but as usual, with all conspiracy theorists, you fail to point to any evidence to back up your theories.
          Keeping digging, brother. I’m sure it’s time well spent.

        3. Sorry fella I’ve made up my mind to whatever extent it needs to be made up, it’s you that’s digging and still looking for evidence, that can’t asses the real info that’s available to you as roosh said, I just don’t know what on earth you would expect me to provide you with. You’ll notice I reply to your comments V quickly, so I’m not Talk Talk Talk, it’s you who drags on the conversation with a shit reply a day later. I just have a lot more to offer and am a lot smarter than you + I haven’t even tried to prove anything yet, mostly just spelt out how you’re a dumb, weak faggot. Go learn about central banks, Bilderberg, EU, BIS, IMF, CFR and countless other organisations, learn your history as well. Then decide for yourself what’s good or bad for you, others and the world. It’s not for me to regurgitate everything for you or tell you what to think. There are way too many sheep for that. You waiting for the TV or your wife to tell you it’s real?
          You still haven’t explained why money must exist as debt, and why your government needs to be trillions in debt……You still haven’t explained why any other conception of the world financial system, and everything else that flows from those in control and subject to it, is a conspiracy theory. Please explain. Is that a law of science that needs to be proven or disproven to you? No it’s not, it’s a man made construct you have bought into, and there is no proof required to debunk your mistaken faith in it. I don’t need to prove to you that the construction of the empire state building was a conspiracy….some dudes really did sit round a table and draw up the blueprints and costs and got that Sh*t built. Why would you need to see them sitting around a table? unless you have some fundamental misunderstanding or lack of knowledge about how stuff gets done? It’s certainly not a conspiracy theory that it got built, you may not know how mathematically or organisationally, but you are welcome to study the architecture, civil engineering or real estate development to better understand, what you don’t need is to catch those dudes sitting around a table to know what they did, and have an opinion of the structure they built. No one needs to prove to you that the empire state building didn’t just grow out of the ground.
          Like I said regardless of what you believe, you and yours face the same reality as everyone else, I hope you find whatever answers you’re looking for. There’s No excuse for cowardice though, intellectual or otherwise.

  9. There is hope.
    What Quintus Curtius and you commented is almost verbatim what I was saying in the late 90s and particularly after the Twin Tower attacks.
    But since then my opinion about some of these points has changed, particularly about the idea that any reaction will be “too little, too late.”
    You say you don’t get it when in the West people do not quickly react to offenses. This is crucial, and contrary to what many think it is not exclusive of our Politically Correct SJW-infected era.
    First, it is a characteristic of the West to react too late. Second, when it eventually reacts it does so in forceful overreaction, because it is no longer possible to give the benefit of the doubt to the enemy and only the toughest attitude is conceivable now. This is a feature of the West, not a bug. We might call it the western slingshot. And yet, every generation loves to think that the slowness in reacting is a hideous bug that has just popped up in their particular era.
    So we must be aware of the precedents. Think about the Thermopiles, think about Attila. Remember also how the senate loved to ignore Cato the Elder about the need to destroy Carthage and how close Hannibal came to destroy Rome. Think about Pearl Harbor and 9/11. Think about Sputnik and Gagarin beating the world’s most industrialized nation in the first stages of the space race. Always ignoring the warnings, always caught with the pants down. Always obscenely unprepared. Always thinking our ancestors were never this naïve, this slow, this pathetic, this close to certain utter defeat.
    Much more relevantly, think about the Reconquista.
    The Reconquista—all of Spanish history, actually—is dramatically misunderstood, and so important lessons remain unlearnt by most.
    Let’s just take a quick look at some key facts:
    • At the time of the invasion in 711, the peninsula was ruled by the Visigoths, a foreign minority who had no particular sense of loyalty to the local Hispano-Roman population, nor vice versa.
    • The locals were abysmally demoralized after losing “their” Roman Empire (a few Roman emperors were actually from Hispania). And after abysmally failing to protect themselves from the many barbarian invasions that followed the Roman collapse.
    • The Visigoths were immersed in a civil war over who should be the king. Then one faction hired a gang of mercenaries from North Africa. The gang broke the deal and decided to keep the whole peninsula for themselves. The Visigoth kingdom became history overnight. Both Visigoth factions completely defeated, lost forever.
    • A few tiny, insignificant Christian chiefdoms, maintained their independence in the cold northern mountain ridges, partly because it was too uncomfortable for the Muslims to fight up there in what used to be obscure Celtic territory.
    • The Muslims from North Africa and Arabia kept sending wave after wave after wave after wave against Spain and Portugal while Europe looked the other way.
    I have to admit that if I had been a Christian hiding in some cold cave up there in the small strip of Asturias in 720, I would have said what I was saying in the late 90s and what you said on that chat with Quintus Curtius. Simply no hope. These people had lost about 95% of their homeland overnight, they were divided, they were insignificant, the most important event in recent history had been the fall of the Empire, then the waves of barbarian invasions and now this. If I had lived there and had had this knowledge of their recent history and someone had said that there was some hope, I would have thought “this man is a dangerous lunatic,” wouldn’t you? Obviously, in a matter of months or years, the Muslims would just mop up the last remnants in the peninsula and march on beyond the Pyrenees to defeat Europe. The end of history, clearly.
    But in the summer of 722 the Christians under Don Pelayo won their first battle at Covadonga and then Poitiers in 733 led by Martel. Yet, for several centuries to come the peninsula still looked like a lost cause.
    But the Spanish and Portuguese did not only reconquer their peninsula for the Cross, they went on to spread their culture to vast new lands.
    Some time ago, Vox Day kindly posted on his blog some thoughts of mine about the Reconquista which you might find interesting for the parallels with what’s happening now: http://voxday.blogspot.com.es/2014/02/mailvox-brief-history-of-reconquista.html
    I also recommend these comments by “very retired” on the British site Samizdata:
    http://www.samizdata.net/2007/01/samizdata-quote-140/#comment-133845
    http://www.samizdata.net/2007/01/samizdata-quote-140/#comment-133855

    1. Very good response. A civilized nation and actually Westerners in the past responded only when provoked sufficiently – when the situation was almost lost. This will happen again and like the very good comments above – it will be terrible. That man has commented on it in 2007:
      “The islamicist utopian, or Caliphate, vision is not only a dangerous delusion for those in the West, who are the objects of jihad, but even more so for the Muslim world, whose continued survival is entirely dependent upon the self-restraint of the very Western culture they have demonized and continually attack.
      It is a constant source of amazement to me that anyone could watch the utterly implacable nature of various western societies slaughtering millions of their own citizens in political purges, and millions more of their adversaries’ citizens during repeated wars, and then decide to antagonize those same societies with scattered, haphazard violent attacks which have little strategic value.
      For a while, certainly, the liberal humanism prevalent in western culture will attempt to maintain a broad committment to basic rights, and to avoid or minimize profiling by racial group or religious affiliation, but if the attacks continue, and become even more destructive, a final dividing line will eventually be reached, and the response will begin with the “Japanese internment” model and move rapidly downhill from there.
      Yes, reform from within Islam is imperative, but not for the survival of the west. In a debased, and morally agonized, form, the west will survive and eventually move past this period of conflict. Islam will not.
      Those who doubt the capacity of western culture for such a terrible response had better take a tour of the gulag archipeligo, Auschwitz, Bergen-Belsen, et al, and visit the Hiroshima memorial.
      From uncounted mass graves, the spirits of millions are calling out to Islam, “Oh, thou fool!””

    2. The other comment is equally good:
      “I have said this before, and will probably say it again, so forgive me—I do not fear the threat of islamicism except as it provokes the return of a savagery which will haunt the west’s dreams and torture our consciences for a century of self-loathing and recrimination.
      I wish to see my great grandchildren walking proudly among the stars, not hiding from the light in an agony of guilt and shame, with the haunting memory of deaths beyond counting screaming through their nightmares.
      Read “Ender’s Game” and “Speaker for the Dead”.
      We are who we are, and who we have come from— that 30,000 years since we were Cro-Magnon is but the blink of an eye.”
      I too do not fear an Islamisation of the West and a global Caliphate ruling in Europe and North America. It will just bring back savagery and all the oh-so-powerful feeling Muslims now will be cursing their forefathers. The Spanish reconquistas once discussed total annihilation of Islam in the 15th century. I fear that such a time will come in the big new conflict.

      1. Indeed, Queen Isabella ordered in her will that her heirs should “not cease in the conquest of Africa.”

    3. This is not the same kind of thing as a war with a foreign nation though
      The problem with the west is internal, a complete degeneration of nationalism. At this point the first question is not now to defeat terrorists, it’s how to eliminate equality from society
      A better way to look at it is that western society is infected with a serious immunodeficiency disease

  10. Thankyou RooshV for being a big man of goodwill. I realise you have Shia father and some of the posts, as we go through the pain of our civilisation collapsing, can be angry and poorly aimed.
    You have allowed me to realise that women are not better than men and that the atrocities we are seeing in the western world are mostly due to and over developed matriarchy and a lack of the male assertion. We’re going to take it back.

  11. Yes – I agree with Quintus, that Europeans would push back when faced with full sharia enforcement.
    The military and police forces are chock-full with nationalists who would instantly go to war against Islamists.
    But I disagree that the elite thinks that they will somehow control the Muslims living in Europe. I think they know that they are almost uncontrollable.
    The only thing that makes sense is a future WWIII, massive interna conflict and subsequent crackdown. The other option is even more high-tech with a chipped population and Robocops patrolling the streets.
    I think that the real upper elite knows, that things will get out of control and they are counting on it.

  12. Kristy, besides scamming on the net, the only way you can “generate cash” is by spreading your legs for knuckle-dragging, room temperature IQ blacks and muzzies.

  13. As a Canadian, I am sad to see the decline in national spirit since the Second World War. I cannot imagine what it is like to be French and being born into a culture with 200 years of irrelevancy.

  14. Some of my conclusions:
    1) The Islamic State threat must be responded to swiftly and directly, i.e. by Western nations putting boots on the ground and capturing Raqqa within a week (month max) and sparing Syrians and the rest of the world a whole lot of misery.
    2) We need to understand what motivates Islamic extremism, why is there this dissatisfaction that provides such an excellent environment for radicalism and allow the Arabs/Middle Eastern peoples to have absolute freedom to do what they want (so long as it doesn’t involved flying planes into buildings or shooting up concert halls), aka GTFO

  15. The fecundity of the simple will outbreed the wealth and riches of the few – QC : bravo on that quote. Just that quote made the listen worthwhile. Roosh is just stroking it out of the ball park with his analysis. I’m hoping, very much hoping, his predictions do NOT come true.

  16. What is common to all Western European nations? It is Jewish infestation. Jews have power over the minds of European peoples through their control of the banking systems, education systems, and most importantly the mass media. After 50 years of relentless brainwashing and easy living Jewish monsters are now going in for the kill. As Dr. William Pierce said it will take an oak table leg to the head to wake the White man up. Once their very safety is threatened every moment they will fight back. Yes, things can turn on a dime. Jews are gambling that won’t happen. It will and these Kike monsters have a reckoning coming to them. Race is everything and the only thing. Blood, kinship, the extended family of race is all that matters. Jews understand this very well. They have expended all their energy upon us to convince us of the lies of multi-culturalism and diversity and tolerence so that they can pursue their genocidal agenda against us.

  17. Go radio red pill!! Was a bit sleepless so I tuned in.. Man, America sounds more far gone than anywhere I have lived but still can see the sickness everywhere on smaller levels. Most people I dare discuss the anti-islamification movements to in Europe think it’s a bunch of nazis. Is a very bad situation but somehow think the handbrake will be pulled by the population sadly a bit later rather than sooner, but definitely think Roosh’s call to immediate action are a very good thing. Here is a very good documentary in German https://youtu.be/8ioDbNI96Xo?list=PL3sHP4UzOos7-Sa3j8aMC_Q_1ADCHa3Vq mainly about refugees crossing the green borders and the lies everyone is told here… I like very much the thought of taking it offline, is a bother only having blue pill acquaintances where you have to self-censor and the “idiots” that were many times referred to in the talk..

  18. Roosh you do a lot of good with this website. No doubt about it. But, saying you don’t blame murderers for what they do? Everyone is accountable for their own sins. A murderer is guilty of murder. Is the greater accountability on those who should be protecting their own households and, by extension, their own towns, cities, countries, etc.? Of course it is. Doesn’t change the fact that every man is accountable for his deeds.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *