ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Friday, August 05, 2016

"The gravest risk since communism"

The Economist sees nationalism as a great evil that is to be defeated rather than the only way to save Western Civilization:
AS POLITICAL theatre, America’s party conventions have no parallel. Activists from right and left converge to choose their nominees and celebrate conservatism (Republicans) and progressivism (Democrats). But this year was different, and not just because Hillary Clinton became the first woman to be nominated for president by a major party. The conventions highlighted a new political faultline: not between left and right, but between open and closed (see article). Donald Trump, the Republican nominee, summed up one side of this divide with his usual pithiness. “Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo,” he declared. His anti-trade tirades were echoed by the Bernie Sanders wing of the Democratic Party.

America is not alone. Across Europe, the politicians with momentum are those who argue that the world is a nasty, threatening place, and that wise nations should build walls to keep it out. Such arguments have helped elect an ultranationalist government in Hungary and a Polish one that offers a Trumpian mix of xenophobia and disregard for constitutional norms. Populist, authoritarian European parties of the right or left now enjoy nearly twice as much support as they did in 2000, and are in government or in a ruling coalition in nine countries. So far, Britain’s decision to leave the European Union has been the anti-globalists’ biggest prize: the vote in June to abandon the world’s most successful free-trade club was won by cynically pandering to voters’ insular instincts, splitting mainstream parties down the middle.

News that strengthens the anti-globalisers’ appeal comes almost daily. On July 26th two men claiming allegiance to Islamic State slit the throat of an 85-year-old Catholic priest in a church near Rouen. It was the latest in a string of terrorist atrocities in France and Germany. The danger is that a rising sense of insecurity will lead to more electoral victories for closed-world types. This is the gravest risk to the free world since communism. Nothing matters more than countering it.
Considering that their counter will consist of "stronger rhetoric, bolder policies and smarter tactics", they're not off to a good start. They are at a disadvantage, of course, because the most effective rhetoric is utilized in the service of the truth, and they are attempting to sell blatant and obvious lies.

But if "nothing matters more than countering" nationalism, that means that nationalism is the only political objective that matters for the opponents of globalism. We need to continue to expose their lies about NATO benefitting America, about the EU benefitting Europe, about free trade and immigration enriching societies, and how cooperation is necessary for fighting terrorism.

If you're still foolish enough to swallow the false assertion that free trade is beneficial to America, perhaps you should consider if you believe any of the other lies you are being told by the same people.

Labels: , ,

138 Comments:

Anonymous Francis August 05, 2016 11:42 AM  

Globalism is a western idea, and only has an echo in these western countries. Anywhere else in the world (and I've been travelling a lot), people are nationalists.
The same can be seen in Europe : the eastern countries have never been infected by the globalist ideology such as the western ones.
I'm very worried for Europe, the civilisation I belong to, but I also hope for I know European Union ideology is less and less chared by the youth. Old generations only believe that "EU is the only way to avoid wars between nations" as I've been hearing all my childhood along.

I hope for you Trump wins in November, guys !

Anonymous Daedalus Mugged August 05, 2016 11:43 AM  

"Nothing matters more than countering" nationalism.

Including survival. The people who espouse this want us to die, and are willing to do the killing, or outsource it.

Anonymous Napoleon 12pdr August 05, 2016 11:43 AM  

This goes far, far deeper than mere trade.

A nationalist believes that the society - the nation - of which he is a part has virtues and a common culture that are worth preserving and promoting. That doesn't mean the national culture is perfect, it doesn't mean other cultures are worthless...but it does mean that there IS a national culture.

Our opponents think purely in terms of economics. To them, there is no difference between cultures and nations. Berlin, Boise, and Bordeaux are all the same. They want the world to be a uniformly bland bowl of mush.

Which is why the nationalists are winning. Nobody takes pride in being part of a bland bowl of mush.

Anonymous 360 August 05, 2016 11:46 AM  

I have been thinking about the EU benefiting Europe question. There has not been a European-wide conflict since the EU's formation. Is this not a result of the EU system? The old alliance system for WWI and WWII seemed to be the predicate for both wars and the new EU system seems to have curbed that a bit.

Anonymous Jill August 05, 2016 11:47 AM  

The author is fairly adamant that it's a great threat and needs to be countered but doesn't give any good reasons for why this is this case. Such zealotry strikes me as being religious.

Anonymous rienzi August 05, 2016 11:49 AM  

"The Economist", making Mayfair and Knightsbridge great again!

OpenID paworldandtimes August 05, 2016 11:50 AM  

This is the gravest risk to the free world since communism

"The wooden stake is the gravest risk to humanity since the crucifix" -- the Vampire

If you're still foolish enough to swallow the false assertion that free trade is beneficial to America, perhaps you should consider if you believe any of the other lies you are being told by the same people

A line of rhetoric that's been effective on newbs who make accept Red Pill truths on women but not on race: "They lied to you about women but told you the truth about everything else."

PA

Blogger Josh August 05, 2016 11:55 AM  

That is a very bad take by the economist

Blogger dc.sunsets August 05, 2016 11:56 AM  

Open borders.
Global migration of capital, including jobs, innovation, patents, etc.

ABOVE ALL a monetary regime where those in power create limitless claims on existing wealth via costless issuance of IOU's, then use every new IOU as collateral, borrowing even more to rush into the market and drive up the marginal price of the assets they hold, erecting a mountain-sized idol of a pyrite calf which holds the masses of men in their thrall.

Every pathology described on this and like-minded sites rests on the religious respect given the wealth value of an electronic Ocean filled with dollar-denominated bonds.

It's like a tribe of savages standing in a circle. The shaman says everyone must, to ward off evil spirits, rub blue paint on his own face. Half the tribesmen are simply too stupid to know better, but the others know it's silly

Blogger dc.sunsets August 05, 2016 11:57 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger szopen August 05, 2016 11:59 AM  

Nationalism still has a long way to go. I know quite a few people who are, by all criteria, nationalists, but yet they react very allergically to the name. One cannot be too optimistic, not until average Joe will proudly declare in public "I am nationalist".

Blogger dc.sunsets August 05, 2016 12:00 PM  

The others who know it's silly are afraid to say so, certain are they that to voice their doubt would incite the others to kill them.

So we're stuck watching this insanity grow by exponential leaps while all the subordinate insanity embeds ever growing disaster.

Anonymous EH August 05, 2016 12:00 PM  

I support Trump's free tirade policy.

Alongside nationalism as the political alternative to globalism must be self-sufficiency, the economic alternative to globalism. Not full autarchy, getting a completely closed system is vastly harder than a mostly-closed system. The Pareto principle sounds about right, getting an 80% closed economy takes 20% of the effort.

Computerized flexible tools are a new industrial revolution more radical than factories moving from central steam engines to electric motors in each tool. It doesn't take much capital now to own a shop that can make copies of all its tools - approaching 80% of the value in each tool, anyway, and do so in weeks or months, not years. That kind of capital return in the hands of many people will end the viscous cycle of the lack of wages suppressing demand for everything else.

Blogger szopen August 05, 2016 12:01 PM  

360 wrote:I have been thinking about the EU benefiting Europe question. There has not been a European-wide conflict since the EU's formation. Is this not a result of the EU system? The old alliance system for WWI and WWII seemed to be the predicate for both wars and the new EU system seems to have curbed that a bit.

I thought US army might have some influence on that too.

Anonymous Gen. Kong August 05, 2016 12:02 PM  

Economist = Lügenpresse. In every possible permutation of the word's meaning. As it was in the USSR, so it is today: There is no news in Truth, and no truth in The News.

Anonymous Maximo Macaroni August 05, 2016 12:02 PM  

To 360: Europe had peace from 1815 to 1914 with no European union. The exception of the short Franco-Prussian war led to an increase in nationalism, not a decrease. The unified Europe under Bonaparte's iron hand was hardly peaceful! Does any European actually think of Europe as his nation? I think not.

OpenID paworldandtimes August 05, 2016 12:04 PM  

Nationalism still has a long way to go. I know quite a few people who are, by all criteria, nationalists, but yet they react very allergically to the name.

Donald Trump understands that, which is why he says "Globalism vs Americanism."

PA

Blogger Gaiseric August 05, 2016 12:07 PM  

I support Trump's free tirade policy.

Tirades have always been free.

Blogger Bob Roddis August 05, 2016 12:08 PM  

I have been an H-H Hoppean libertarian since 1973, which I think is before Hoppe discovered libertarianism. I mean that in the sense of understanding how a “conservative” community with private roads and sidewalks would be able to exclude outsiders who do not reflect their values.

https://mises.org/library/hayek-meet-press

The book that resulted in my conversion at age 22 from being a depressed SJW was “POLITICS IN PLURAL SOCIETIES - A Theory of Democratic Instability” by Alvin Rabushka and Kenneth A. Shepsle from 1972. The book is free online:

http://web.stanford.edu/~rabushka/politics%20in%20plural%20societies.pdf

You can also buy it from Amazon:

http://tinyurl.com/z6aassf

I read this book in conjunction with Rothbard’s “Power and Market”.

The thesis of the book is that multi-ethnic democracies invariably result in ethnic conflict and often in ethnic slaughter. Always always always. The only exception would be (perhaps) if there were fewer “public goods” being controlled by the government. Otherwise, the largest ethnic group will win the election and in a democratic socialist government, they will control most of the assets of the society. AND THEY ALWAYS VOTE ETHNIC. And reward ethnic. (It also seems to me that people do not tend to buy ethnic, but buy the best and cheapest products.)

I had never heard of Vox Day until his debate with Bob Murphy in June. You may be surprised that in almost 44 years of preaching about the insights and lessons of the “Plural Societies” book, the response from libertarians has been one big flatline (that’s supposed to be a joke).

Blogger VD August 05, 2016 12:09 PM  

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, Ilion, and merely delete your comment. Never, ever "fix" my words or attempt to speak for me again.

You can speak for yourself. You do not speak for me even in jest. You are not my editor, you are not my employer, you are a guest here and you are expected to comport yourself accordingly.

Blogger VD August 05, 2016 12:10 PM  

There has not been a European-wide conflict since the EU's formation. Is this not a result of the EU system?

No, it is the result of a) 70 years of American military occupation and b) nuclear weapons.

Blogger dc.sunsets August 05, 2016 12:11 PM  

Our opponents think purely in terms of economics. To them, there is no difference between cultures and nations. Berlin, Boise, and Bordeaux are all the same. They want the world to be a uniformly bland bowl of mush.
Disagree. They spout religious dogma, that is all. The very notion that all cultures are the same is falsified at every point of the compass and every moment in history.

Those pushing the Economist's bull have no answer for why those flooding into the West are doing so. Why, I ask? Are they incapable of producing the fruits they seek at home? It is obvious that they are just as incapable of doing so EVERYWHERE they go. Even an American city full of English-speaking physicians from Hyderabad would still reproduce Hyderabad. The dirt isn't magic. The people are FIXED, unchanging. I see it all the time.

So no, this isn't about economics. This is about globalist elites doing the equivalent of burning down the most important factory in existence in order to loot the change out of the employee break room vending machines.

Anonymous 360 August 05, 2016 12:12 PM  

Europe had peace from 1815 to 1914 with no European union.

Fair point, but there is some credence to the fact that both the alliance system and rising nationalism during that time set the stage for both world wars.

Does any European actually think of Europe as his nation? I think not.

Nor do I mean to imply that. But I think the EU as an alliance apparatus has been helpful. At this time, joining and leaving the EU is voluntary. If that changes (I think it will), then I would no longer see it as beneficial in this regard.

Blogger Escoffier August 05, 2016 12:13 PM  

Szopen

I have been referring to myself as a nationalist in public for about six months. The reactions are interesting.

Anonymous Francis August 05, 2016 12:15 PM  

@ 4
1) We should distinguish between wars : WWI was between nations, WWII was between ideologies before to be between country.
2) This seen, the peaceful consequences of EU becomes questionnable. If no more nations, no more wars between nations, but could it avoid any other kind of wars ?
That was theoretical questions. Now back to the facts :
3) I don't think UE has brought any peace to Europe. Peace since WII came from a desire of people and governement not to enter in a war again. Not to mention the all meaning of the expression "cold war"...
4)Nowadays, young generations from all countries know eachothers, feel more connected to eachothers. My grand parents hated germany, my parents didn't care; and none of them had to deal with germans for real. But I myself learnt to appreciate germans through my own experience. I think we (under 30 years old)could all say the same story.

4) There was commercial agreements before the UE. So if the old idea of peace as a consequence of business and good economics is valid, the EU should not be considered as necessary for a peacefull Europe to be (all the opposite actually!).

Globalism is confusion. It wish for unification, by the mean of relations. But relations suppose two distincts entities to be related one to the other. Free trade, agreements between countries etc. don't need globalism to be, and globalism at a certain point, will neeed them to disappear, just as it needs entities to disapear to realyze its dream of unification.

Globalism is a giant tyrannic dream, no more. it will hopefuly be a cause for a war of free men against its sick brains and arms.

Anonymous Frankenstein McBadperson August 05, 2016 12:15 PM  

"The danger is that a rising sense of insecurity will lead to more electoral victories for closed-world types."

That's a _danger_? It's the GOAL, stupid. And what is with this "closed-world" business?

I would like to camp out indefinitely in the offices of The Economist, along with my 35 impoverished Somali rapist friends. I'm sure they've got enough couches for all of us. And they won't mind the chanting and the prayers five times a day during work hours, not at all. Hmm, but I wonder if their offices are "closed" to us. You can close an office, but not the WORLD?!?

"This is the gravest risk to the free world since communism. Nothing matters more than countering it."

Pop quiz: the people who wrote that are...
a) crazy people
b) stupid people
c) evil people

This is rock paper scissors though. You don't get to say All of the above.

Anonymous 360 August 05, 2016 12:16 PM  

No, it is the result of a) 70 years of American military occupation

Do you mean American military occupation of Europe?

and b) nuclear weapons.

I did not think about nuclear weapons. I agree that that is a great deterrent to war and would seem to be a good reason why there has not been continental war since it's development.

Blogger SemiSpook37 August 05, 2016 12:17 PM  

So, how long until the geniuses here at the Economist start projecting, because this was an excellent double-down...

Blogger Joe Doakes August 05, 2016 12:18 PM  

The weird part is Globalists trying to shame Nationalists on the basis of racism and privilege, when Globalists are pitching globalism on the basis of racism and privilege.

The threat is always: "If Brexit, you won't be able to take your holiday in the South of France" which is a nice, White, privileged place to go and we don't want to give up that possibility.

Globalists never threaten "If Brexit, you won't be able to take your holiday in Somalia" because who would want to? If that's all I'm missing, then Brexit for certain.

Similarly, Globalists threaten "If you halt immigration, you keep out Muslim doctors and your children will die" but never "you'll keep out Guatemalan gardeners and your lawn will die."

Do they really believe ordinary schmucks living ordinary lives can't see through their privileged and racist hype?

.

Blogger Nick S August 05, 2016 12:20 PM  

Things are getting more bizarre all the time. Liberals don't seem to understand that what they are doubling down on is cutting their own throats to spite their face. That'll teach us! It's insanely shallow reasoning.

There are a couple good lectures by Dr. Os Guinness that boil it down and put it in perspective if you can stand to sit through a couple hours of lecturing. I enjoy a good lecturer. Most people don't.

Os Guinness - Time for Truth: Living Free in a World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

and

Dr. Os Guinness - A Free People's Suicide

My children and grandchildren are going to reap the consequences of what happens in the next few years. I don't take it lightly.

Anonymous Francis August 05, 2016 12:20 PM  

There has not been a European-wide conflict since the EU's formation. Is this not a result of the EU system?

No, it is the result of a) 70 years of American military occupation and b) nuclear weapons.

Indeed. That's what I meant too. And I had to this argument, the fact that we feel more and more all "europeans" (but this doesnt make us feel as a nation, though).

Anonymous Frankenstein McBadperson August 05, 2016 12:26 PM  

"One cannot be too optimistic, not until average Joe will proudly declare in public "I am nationalist".

I think you meant to say, "One cannot be too optimistic, not until average Jew will proudly declare in public "I am an _American_ nationalist." And mean it.

Yours til Niagara falls....

Blogger pyrrhus August 05, 2016 12:27 PM  

"The threat is always: "If Brexit, you won't be able to take your holiday in the South of France" which is a nice, White, privileged place to go and we don't want to give up that possibility."
The weird part, which we noticed when we were there last year, being that the South of France has a lot of surly looking moslems and more than a few African men....

Blogger VD August 05, 2016 12:27 PM  

Do you mean American military occupation of Europe?

Yes.

Fair point, but there is some credence to the fact that both the alliance system and rising nationalism during that time set the stage for both world wars.

And you don't think the EU and the immigration it has foisted on the European nations is setting the stage for something very nasty now?

Anonymous Frankenstein McBadperson August 05, 2016 12:30 PM  

"Does any European actually think of Europe as his nation? I think not."

Perhaps, but 'any European' had better start thinking of all other Europeans as his _people_.

Anonymous Amarnoth August 05, 2016 12:34 PM  

With the rapaciousness of this generation of boyscouts, I wouldn't doubt the camp counselors are a little less glib than in years past.

Not sure, but something about the scouts' refusal to put on sunscreen. Open exposure to that equatorial orb caused some real melanomas to appear. Horrible. It seems some rather delicate boundaries were penetrated at Camp Cologne and Camp Calais. So much so that some of this year's campers, those who put on sunscreen, have started calling themselves "Sunscreen Nationalist," whatever that means.

I can only hope there are more of these "Sunscreen Nationalists" in the future!

Anonymous fop August 05, 2016 12:36 PM  

There has not been a European-wide conflict since the EU's formation.

There hasn't been a major economic crash since the fed introduced quantitative easing.

But God help us when it comes.

Blogger Nate August 05, 2016 12:40 PM  

...

So... for america to do... what almost every other country in the world does... is hugely dangerous for america!

K.

Anonymous Headcannon August 05, 2016 12:49 PM  

"This is the gravest risk to the free world since communism. Nothing matters more than countering it."

From the mouths of Marxists.

Anonymous Frankenstein McBadperson August 05, 2016 12:51 PM  

But Nate, don't you see? America isn't a country like other countries. It's just a giant global cookie jar, designed for every greasy pair of brown fingers on planet earth to grub around in, til they find the Crackerjack Prize!

Blogger Leo Little Book in Shenzhen August 05, 2016 12:53 PM  

You can trust the Economist not to lie for money, because they believe the fundamental human motivator is greed.

Blogger Brian S August 05, 2016 12:54 PM  

Frankenstein McBadperson wrote:til they find the Crackerjack Prize!

is that where they're getting their driver licenses?

Blogger Grandpa Lampshade August 05, 2016 12:54 PM  

These people SMDH

Summary of the article: Nationalism is bad because we say it is and they're a bunch of scare mongers with their alarmist talk of bad things happening by importing the Mid East. Unfortunately it's really hard to combat this because these Moslems we imported from the Mid East keep doing things like blowing up our base and cutting our dude's heads off.

Anonymous Bell Worthington August 05, 2016 12:56 PM  

"disregard for constitutional norms." This is where you can tell the Economist goes beyond shilling into flat out lying. They make it sound as if Poland/Hungary have thrown out free speech and sent critics to the gulag. The reality is that these democratic countries from guy on the street all the way to head of state have more or less said "enough is enough," and the army of Barbara Spectres no longer command the influence they once had. "Constitutional norms" means the government taking its marching orders from a parade of foreign NGOs and Sorosbux.

If there's "disregard" for anything in Europe, it's disregard for the lives of native inhabitants. That's the real story that they refuse to tell.

Blogger Jakeithus August 05, 2016 12:59 PM  

"As for tactics, the question for pro-open types, who are found on both sides of the traditional left-right party divide, is how to win. The best approach will differ by country. In the Netherlands and Sweden, centrist parties have banded together to keep out nationalists. A similar alliance defeated the National Front’s Jean-Marie Le Pen in the run-off for France’s presidency in 2002, and may be needed again to beat his daughter in 2017."

In the long run, this is a horrible strategy for the globalists. Sure you might win elections now but it does nothing to win the battle of ideas, and if people keep seeing the side with the better ideas losing to the side with the better political tricks, they're going to get resentful and more extreme in their opposition. There will be a breaking point, and the fact that they don't realize this is pure ignorance.

It's like the #NeverTrumpers who think they can sabotage Trump now, help Hillary out in the name of globalism and the status-quo, and then reestablish themselves as the power players of the Right at a later time. It's like they think that this fight over Americanism vs Globalism will play itself out now, and then after 2016 the most important political debate will go back to whether Government should grow out of hand at a fast rate or a less fast rate. It Trump loses and it is viewed by people as a result of a Republican elite betrayal, there is no going back to the prior status quo and I don't think they realize this.

Blogger kurt9 August 05, 2016 1:01 PM  

It's been well over a decade since I last read "The Economist".

Anonymous Philipp August 05, 2016 1:08 PM  

I did not expect anything else from the Economist.

However, please note that they described the EU "as free-trade club". No the EU is not a free trade zone; it is a customs union. That is significant difference. A customs unions errects tariff walls at its borders (so much for being "open") and does not allow its members to sign free trade deals with other countries. The EU is modeled after the German "Zollverein", which was founded in the 1830s to help unify Germany. The EU's mission and goal is to do away with the nation-states and create the United States of Europe.

Secondly, the Economist regards nationalism as the "gravest risk to the free world". Nationalism. Not Islamism. For them, it does not matter that it is Muslims who are killing Europeans on a regular basis by now. They still regard nationalists as the problem.

Anonymous Utah4Trump August 05, 2016 1:10 PM  

I once sent to a meeting of the Chelsea and Westminster Conservative Association where one old boy lamented that young people could no longer afford to buy a house out of one year's income

Blogger CarpeOro August 05, 2016 1:20 PM  

360 wrote:Europe had peace from 1815 to 1914 with no European union.

Fair point, but there is some credence to the fact that both the alliance system and rising nationalism during that time set the stage for both world wars.

Does any European actually think of Europe as his nation? I think not.

Nor do I mean to imply that. But I think the EU as an alliance apparatus has been helpful. At this time, joining and leaving the EU is voluntary. If that changes (I think it will), then I would no longer see it as beneficial in this regard.


Both wrong. Franco-Prussian war? Despite his name I gather Maximo is not from Italy (while most of the Risorgimento was an inter-Italian conflict, Piedmont, France and Austro-Hungary fought over Venetia). Kind of skipping over the Prussian Astronaut-Hungarian war, two Balkan Wars, the Crimean War, etc.
That being said, the "alliance system" you mention has every resemblance to The NATO-Warsaw pact situation, except the addition of the USA made it even larger in scope. The continuation and expansion of NATO very arguably continues a situation that would have ended with the break up of the Soviet Union. The reason it didn't end and was revived is because taking half measures was to the benefit of the industrial-military complex Ike was worried about. Thinking that the EU, a bureaucratic monstrosity that actively works to undermine the constituent states, is a positive only if you think that Europeans are not ready for self government and need a strong dictatorship to protect them. The only protection being done is for the political and banking elite - the common man is viewed as an impediment if not outright enemy.

Blogger SemiSpook37 August 05, 2016 1:20 PM  

Jakeithus wrote:It's like the #NeverTrumpers who think they can sabotage Trump now, help Hillary out in the name of globalism and the status-quo, and then reestablish themselves as the power players of the Right at a later time. It's like they think that this fight over Americanism vs Globalism will play itself out now, and then after 2016 the most important political debate will go back to whether Government should grow out of hand at a fast rate or a less fast rate. It Trump loses and it is viewed by people as a result of a Republican elite betrayal, there is no going back to the prior status quo and I don't think they realize this.

This was the point someone brought up yesterday re: media narrative. I think we all collectively knew that what is currently happening was going to happen. The problem that I'm seeing, along with others, is that these people in the ivory tower that is DC honestly think that they're going to be taken seriously by any rational person of any stripe after espousing so much nonsense in such a hysterical manner.

At one time, this sort of thing would be considered laughable. Now? It's bordering on pathetic.

Blogger CarpeOro August 05, 2016 1:21 PM  

Dang spell check.

Blogger Doom August 05, 2016 1:24 PM  

"If you're still foolish enough to swallow the false assertion that free trade is beneficial to America, perhaps you should consider if you believe any of the other lies you are being told by the same people."

That is one of the best basic arguments to be made. I have found that many on the liberal side are against, personally, everything they say they generally favor in politicians. Either liars, stupid, evil, or literally retarded. Though even a lot of middlings can't quite catch why supporting immigration and wanting fewer people in their country, and the world at large, doesn't fit. A lot of them refuse the all or nothing, still sticking with "nuance". Some, I think, have slowly come around. But they had to have this sort of notion stuck in their craw, then allowed time to chew the fat.

Of course, there are some debates about how to or not to do things. Just dump NATO? Some would. I have been anti-NATO, really, for over a decade. But that doesn't mean I believe in just dumping it. A planned withdrawal, with real time-frames if some leeway. Oh, the other thing? If we leave NATO I expect that means, in their next conflag we stay home. Make that constitutional or something. I can't see the difference between new and old Russia and new and old Western Europe... Nazi, commie, socialist of other bents, all the same and they seem to love it.

Blogger YIH August 05, 2016 1:27 PM  

OT: NRO goes to faceberg comments.
As of [August 4, 2016 2:00 PM], NRO will be moving its comments section from Disqus to Facebook.
If you have built up a set of conversations over the years, worry not: All comments on existing posts will remain intact and linked to Disqus. But in order to comment on new posts, you’ll need a Facebook account.

Surprised? Me neither.

OpenID peppermintfrosted August 05, 2016 1:29 PM  

> stronger rhetoric

"Go away or I shall call you racist a second time!"

Blogger Snidely Whiplash August 05, 2016 1:32 PM  

360 wrote:There has not been a European-wide conflict since the EU's formation.

There hasn't been an America-wide conflict since the Spanish-American war.

Which proves what, exactly?

Anonymous 5343 August 05, 2016 1:33 PM  

YIH wrote:OT: NRO goes to faceberg comments.

As of [August 4, 2016 2:00 PM], NRO will be moving its comments section from Disqus to Facebook.

If you have built up a set of conversations over the years, worry not: All comments on existing posts will remain intact and linked to Disqus. But in order to comment on new posts, you’ll need a Facebook account.


Surprised? Me neither.


Left NRO forever with the Derb Debacle, and I let Rich Lowry have it with both barrels at the time, if I recall.

This is a match made in whatever nebulous lukewarm place cuckservatives go to when they die.

Blogger CarpeOro August 05, 2016 1:33 PM  

YIH wrote:OT: NRO goes to faceberg comments.

As of [August 4, 2016 2:00 PM], NRO will be moving its comments section from Disqus to Facebook.

If you have built up a set of conversations over the years, worry not: All comments on existing posts will remain intact and linked to Disqus. But in order to comment on new posts, you’ll need a Facebook account.


Surprised? Me neither.


I'm kind of surprised. They think it may make a difference in their dwindling readership? Never mind. They still think they are relevant, so no, not a surprise.

Blogger bob k. mando August 05, 2016 1:42 PM  

13. EH August 05, 2016 12:00 PM
I support Trump's free tirade policy.



this is the MOST AWESOME reason to vote for Trump i've ever seen. how have i not heard of this before?

it's the birthright of every American to tirade freely about town!

a tirade in every pot and a soap box in every garage!

Anonymous Philipp August 05, 2016 1:43 PM  

@55: There was the "Chaco war" between Paraguay and Bolivia in the 1930s.

However that was the only inter-state war in South America during the 20th century (if one ignores some border clashes between Ecquador and Peru in the 1990s). One war in the entire century despite the fact that the continent had its fair share of Communist rebellions, uprisings, coups, military dictatorships ect. South America also did not have any equivalent to the EU during the 20th century. And still one war during the entire century.

So, no, one does not need to abolish the (nation-)states in order to have peace. Actually the EU's attempt to create the political union is endangering the peace in Europe. Remember that the EU leaders toppled two democratically elected governments in 2011 (Greece and Italy).

Blogger CarpeOro August 05, 2016 1:48 PM  

@59

How can you forget the Football war in Central America?

Blogger bob k. mando August 05, 2016 1:50 PM  

nationalism is the worst evil possible.

unless we're talking about Israel.

Blogger Robert Divinity August 05, 2016 1:50 PM  

Nationalism still has a long way to go. I know quite a few people who are, by all criteria, nationalists, but yet they react very allergically to the name. One cannot be too optimistic, not until average Joe will proudly declare in public "I am nationalist".

The average Joe is nationalist and even now doesn't know that is something to be hidden.

There has not been a European-wide conflict since the EU's formation.

There's a European-wide invasion underway even as we type.

Economist = Lügenpresse. In every possible permutation of the word's meaning. As it was in the USSR, so it is today: There is no news in Truth, and no truth in The News.

Absolutely. It is fun to watch Luegenpresse ghost dance the constitution in this drivel, too.

So no, this isn't about economics. This is about globalist elites doing the equivalent of burning down the most important factory in existence in order to loot the change out of the employee break room vending machines.

The burning is the goal, looting the vending machines is the icing on the cake.

The weird part is Globalists trying to shame Nationalists on the basis of racism and privilege, when Globalists are pitching globalism on the basis of racism and privilege.

I may steal that in the future.


August 05, 2016 11:47 AM


The author is fairly adamant that it's a great threat and needs to be countered but doesn't give any good reasons for why this is this case. Such zealotry strikes me as being religious.


Ironically, the globalists are the most zealous utopians since--the communists.



a Trumpian mix of xenophobia and disregard for constitutional norms

As if we have constitutional norms any longer.

In the long run, this is a horrible strategy for the globalists. Sure you might win elections now but it does nothing to win the battle of ideas, and if people keep seeing the side with the better ideas losing to the side with the better political tricks, they're going to get resentful and more extreme in their opposition.

Let's hope. Survival in the interim will be a struggle, though.

Secondly, the Economist regards nationalism as the "gravest risk to the free world". Nationalism. Not Islamism. For them, it does not matter that it is Muslims who are killing Europeans on a regular basis by now. They still regard nationalists as the problem.

Muslims don't threaten their bottom line.

Yet.

The problem that I'm seeing, along with others, is that these people in the ivory tower that is DC honestly think that they're going to be taken seriously by any rational person of any stripe after espousing so much nonsense in such a hysterical manner.

Being taken seriously is or would be a bonus for them. Frankly, they don't care as long as they remain in the tower.

Anonymous Philipp August 05, 2016 1:57 PM  

@60: Because it took place in Central America and I was writing about South America.

Blogger CarpeOro August 05, 2016 1:58 PM  

Tangentially, National People's Radio once again shows what happens when amateurs fail to keep up on the Party's talking points. Still bringing up how evil Trump was for saying anything about the father of a soldier who won a gold star posthumously. Must have missed the memo that while Khan was waving a book around that he had never read (the Constitution in pocketbook form) he had commented on needing it to be replaced by sharia.

Anonymous RCFlyer August 05, 2016 2:01 PM  

Re National Review going to Faceberg...

I left Hot Air when they did the same, haven't been back. If they're still afloat this time next year I'll be amazed.

Anonymous SciVo August 05, 2016 2:03 PM  

Jill wrote:The author is fairly adamant that it's a great threat and needs to be countered but doesn't give any good reasons for why this is this case. Such zealotry strikes me as being religious.

No, it's incentivized. There is no need to explain why a man would perform hard labor all day in the hot sun if you know that he is getting something in exchange, and there is no need for a vampire to explain why it's the most horrible thing in the universe ever for Western men to shake off the trance and stop bending their necks to be drained.

Anonymous Napoleon 12pdr August 05, 2016 2:10 PM  

@66: I'd love to see what National Review's page view count really is. I've pretty well dumped them...and did so before they went all anti-Trump, all the time. They've been the Inside the I-95 Axis of Evil pseudo-conservative rag for years.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash August 05, 2016 2:14 PM  

Ilíon wrote:What a hypocritical asshole
Post ing a link to your inane drivel, where you call us all idiots and German fascists one step from killing Jews, because we don't think "Free Trade" as it is practiced has benefited us.
You're a fool and tool of the corporate fascists, and you're damn proud of it.

Blogger YIH August 05, 2016 2:19 PM  

@56 5343
Left NRO forever with the Derb Debacle, and I let Rich Lowry have it with both barrels at the time, if I recall.
That's why I thought it was worth mentioning, I happened to see a mention of it at The Z Blog and googled it to confirm. Like I said, no real surprise, NR is neoconman, which means Israel uber allis and globalist (provided ''the right'' people run it, of course) I too quit them over the sacking of Derb, but this shows NR is going full-on (((big media))) like most newspaper/TV/radio sites (that even allow comments at all). I don't doubt that faceberg will eventually start policing NR's content as well as it's comments.

Blogger Robert Divinity August 05, 2016 2:24 PM  

I don't doubt that faceberg will eventually start policing NR's content as well as it's comments.

Buckley could have shown Zuckerberg a thing or two about purging material that causes a stir down at the club.

Blogger Servant of the Chief August 05, 2016 2:45 PM  

"the world’s most successful free-trade club"

By whose standards? Antartica?

Blogger Dave Narby August 05, 2016 2:47 PM  

Interesting perspective on "Free Trade" that will be appreciated here (and may prove persuasive) http://www.alhambrapartners.com/2016/08/02/whos-the-barbarian/

Nationalism in 90 seconds (full of goodfeelz!) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCC-8OEiZ8s

Blogger SemiSpook37 August 05, 2016 2:53 PM  

YIH wrote:OT: NRO goes to faceberg comments.

As of [August 4, 2016 2:00 PM], NRO will be moving its comments section from Disqus to Facebook.

If you have built up a set of conversations over the years, worry not: All comments on existing posts will remain intact and linked to Disqus. But in order to comment on new posts, you’ll need a Facebook account.


Surprised? Me neither.


I absolutely abhor places that insist on using Failbook commenting. It's becoming more and more frequent, which is unfortunate.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash August 05, 2016 3:04 PM  

Ilíon wrote:While Master Whiplash will certainly join a pile-on, here in this "safe-space", should one manage to pull itself together, what none of us will ever see is Master Whiplash attempting to rationally explain to my 1.5 readers why it is that what I said is "inane drivel", nor will we ever see him explain how it is that I, rather than he, espouses leftism.

I never called you a Leftie. Inane Libertarian, definitely. Cuckservative, probably.
What you said is inane drivel because you are inane and you drivel.

You're also a gutless gamma that can't stand the idea that Vox slapped your stupid bitch ass down when you tried to derail the conversation by mocking him. The passive-aggressive reposting it on your blog and posting a link here is the gamma tell.

And finally your "point" (that trade restrictions mean slavery and the enrichment of the elite) has been conclusively destroyed by actual experience. What has 40 years of Free Trade dogma done for the people of the US? Made them more free than they were?

Of course, being a little, useless, libertarian gamma bitch, you prefer your theory and "thought experiments" to actual experience and history.

Anonymous BGKB August 05, 2016 3:20 PM  

Ilíon August 05, 2016 1:53 PM What a hypocritical asshole

If you follow the link Ilion is asking to be banned for cucking.


Nothing matters more than countering it. As long as one gay caKKKe lay unbaked the left's fight against the 1% can wait

Our opponents think purely in terms of economics. To them, there is no difference between cultures and nations

The Rivkin document Snowden released proves ((())) know differences exist and are weaponized for profit. https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2011/05/14/in-honor-of-french-reader-understanding-the-rivkin-project/

"The danger is that a rising sense of insecurity will lead to more electoral victories for closed-world types."

I am willing to pay a few extra dollars and jump though more hoops remove the chance of me being beheaded in Capri

Pop quiz: the people who wrote that are...a) crazy people b) stupid people c) evil people

You have the right ))) but not the left (((

but never "you'll keep out Guatemalan gardeners and your lawn will die."

I didn't start the "they will take away your home depot BJs"

Muslims don't threaten their bottom line.Yet.

The American woman stabbed to death by the Norwegian Somali in London was married to a high up member of an Open Borders group, one of the survivors is an Israeli. Moslems will attack weak leftist targets first, something I can't convince faggots of.

Anonymous Avenge Harambe! August 05, 2016 3:24 PM  

"Such arguments have helped elect an ultranationalist government in Hungary and a Polish one that offers a Trumpian mix of xenophobia and disregard for constitutional norms."

If we're so damned xenophobic and evil, perhaps they should leave us the fuck alone and stay out of our lands. Leave voluntarily or by force, the choice is theirs.

Blogger pyrrhus August 05, 2016 3:33 PM  

The bizarre aspect of the headline, it strikes me, is that fundamentally Globalism IS Communism, with the difference being a different group of kommissars......

Anonymous Bell Worthington August 05, 2016 3:34 PM  

360 wrote:There has not been a European-wide conflict since the EU's formation.

I have a rock that's guaranteed to keep tigers away. No tiger attacks on my person ever since I started carrying it. You wanna buy?

Anonymous BGKB August 05, 2016 3:39 PM  

Ludenpress starts to lose leftists.

You’ve lost a subscriber because of your relentless bias against Trump — and I’m not even a Republican,” writes an Arizonan.

“I never thought I’d see the day when I, as a liberal, would start getting so frustrated with the one-sided reporting that I would start hopping over to the Fox News webpage to read an article and get the rest of the story that the NYT refused to publish,” writes a woman from California."

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/08/john-v-walsh/ny-times-relentlessly-biased-trump/

Blogger Quadko August 05, 2016 3:50 PM  

One cannot be too optimistic, not until average Joe will proudly declare in public "I am nationalist".
I think that's because so many (esp. in media and schools) are socialists, and admitting or adopting nationalism would make them National Socialists. And that's separate from the existing resistance of socialism's goal being globalism.

Anonymous Bell Worthington August 05, 2016 3:52 PM  

pyrrhus wrote:The bizarre aspect of the headline, it strikes me, is that fundamentally Globalism IS Communism, with the difference being a different group of kommissars......

Took until the 79th comment, but that's it in a nutshell, isn't it...

I'd argue that the (((commissars))) are rather similar to the last time around. Of course this whole globalism mess has lifted a few goy yachts as well. Though the useful idiot skippers would never admit that their "neoliberalism" actually serves the international communists.

Blogger Were-Puppy August 05, 2016 3:55 PM  

@4 360
I have been thinking about the EU benefiting Europe question. There has not been a European-wide conflict since the EU's formation. Is this not a result of the EU system? The old alliance system for WWI and WWII seemed to be the predicate for both wars and the new EU system seems to have curbed that a bit.
---

Really? It looks from here like the EU succeeded where Hitler failed, and have conquered most of Europe.

Blogger Were-Puppy August 05, 2016 4:01 PM  

@5 Jill

The author is fairly adamant that it's a great threat and needs to be countered but doesn't give any good reasons for why this is this case. Such zealotry strikes me as being religious.
---

As I try and noodle out the globalists, there seem to be many factions. I'm not even sure they are working together, they sometime look to be cross purpose against each other.

Here is one example of a religion component -

AJ sneaks into Bohemian Grove ceremonies
https://youtu.be/FpKdSvwYsrE

Blogger Bob Loblaw August 05, 2016 4:07 PM  

Really? It looks from here like the EU succeeded where Hitler failed, and have conquered most of Europe.

Except Hitler wasn't conquering just to conquer. He was a Malthusian who believed if the German race didn't expand Germany would become overpopulated and fall prey to mass starvation - the goal of the push Eastward was to replace the people living there with Germans. The EU seems designed to do the opposite by replacing Germans with other people.

Blogger SirHamster August 05, 2016 4:09 PM  

Avenge Harambe! wrote:If we're so damned xenophobic and evil, perhaps they should leave us the fuck alone and stay out of our lands.

It is criminal to encourage refugees to go to a land where they will be victimized by racism and intolerance.

Blogger Were-Puppy August 05, 2016 4:12 PM  

@11 szopen

Nationalism still has a long way to go. I know quite a few people who are, by all criteria, nationalists, but yet they react very allergically to the name. One cannot be too optimistic, not until average Joe will proudly declare in public "I am nationalist".
---

A lot of us who use Disqus at BB have taken the little verified check mark and tag, and modified it to be a checkmark and say Nationalist instead.

Blogger Jon M August 05, 2016 4:15 PM  

@79: "Globalism IS Communism, with the difference being a different group of kommissars......"

Kill shot. Painful, true, and insulting to all the right people.

*golf clap*

Anonymous Bz August 05, 2016 4:23 PM  

"The Economist", making Mayfair and Knightsbridge great again!

Both areas incidentally now owned by Saudis, Qataris and some Russian oligarchs and thus far from great. But I'm sure the properties sold for a sweet penny.

Anonymous Bz August 05, 2016 4:25 PM  

The Economist will not rest until Eton has a muslim head master. (With impeccable oxbridge credentials, of course.)

Anonymous Bz August 05, 2016 4:29 PM  

Read the article, and you will find that the utopian vision of The Economist is increased profits through globalism, and welfare for those who get crushed. Inspiring.

Blogger VD August 05, 2016 4:35 PM  

Banned and spammed, Ilion. You're done here.

Blogger VD August 05, 2016 4:41 PM  

It looks from here like the EU succeeded where Hitler failed, and have conquered most of Europe.

So did Hitler and Napoleon. Both went up against Russia and failed. Interesting to see that EU/NATO appears hell-bent on repeating their mistake.

Anonymous MK August 05, 2016 4:44 PM  

I think there is powerful economic incentive in business to think "globalists". Business leaders want their companies to become large multinationals. How can a national business compete with a multinational one ?

And even if most people don't work for them, multinationals usually pay more and therefore can hire the best employees.

Blogger Student in Blue August 05, 2016 4:57 PM  

How can a national business compete with a multinational one ?

China has an interesting way of going about it.

If you want to have any access to their markets, you *have* to have a local partner/sponsor that it goes through.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash August 05, 2016 4:59 PM  

MK wrote:How can a national business compete with a multinational one?
How can 30 craft breweries in Portland OR compete with InBev and Miller-Coors? They can, easily, by being closer to their customers and providing a better product.
Unless the government interferes.

And even if most people don't work for them, multinationals usually pay more and therefore can hire the (((best))) employees.
Fixed your spelling error.
The don't win by hiring the best employees. I've worked at 4 different multi-nationals. Uniformly, the executives are babbling idiots. They win by buying markets and bribing the government to hobble the competition.

Anonymous MK August 05, 2016 5:18 PM  

Student in Blue said:
China has an interesting way of going about it.

Japan and China are globalist in business but they don´t allow open immigration. Vox says open immigration is the logical consequence of economic globalization but I don't see how.

Snidely Whiplash:

Thanks for the example of craft breweries. Coffee roasting is another case of local business successfully competing against global giants.

Blogger Were-Puppy August 05, 2016 5:29 PM  

@86 Bob Loblaw

Except Hitler wasn't conquering just to conquer. He was a Malthusian who believed if the German race didn't expand Germany would become overpopulated and fall prey to mass starvation - the goal of the push Eastward was to replace the people living there with Germans. The EU seems designed to do the opposite by replacing Germans with other people.
---

That's what I meant earlier about finding different factions of globalists. There are a bunch that are still malthusian. Check the GA guidestones. They want to cap the world pop. around 500 million.

My Silent Gen relative still goes on and on about how the world is over populated.

Blogger lowercaseb August 05, 2016 5:31 PM  

VD wrote:Banned and spammed, Ilion. You're done here.

wow...I took a peek at his blog and I thought for sure that was Catalytic Converter or whatever the name was of the last guy who kept writing giant missives on whatever blog he could find about how Vox was so unfair and how much he didn't care.

I'm still kinda new here, but they really are starting to sound all alike.

Blogger Azimus August 05, 2016 5:31 PM  

From the article:
"The multilateral system of institutions, rules and alliances, led by America, has underpinned global prosperity for seven decades"


It is amazing to me that globalists try to lay claim to the victory of the cold war, and the victory of World War 2 that set up the US for 5+ decades of prosperity. Funny I don't remember any globalist slogans when they compared the Warsaw Pact to the Free world. I remember a lot of talk about freedom, and individualism. Globalism was the hammer-and-sickle folks. I wasn't around when WW2 got started but from the footage I saw there was a lot of emphasis on a nation that was "suddenly and deliberately attacked by... the Empire of Japan."

I think the globalists can probably lay claim to most everything from the Bush 41 Administration on down. He was the "New World Order" president after all.

Blogger Were-Puppy August 05, 2016 5:33 PM  

@92 VD

It looks from here like the EU succeeded where Hitler failed, and have conquered most of Europe.

So did Hitler and Napoleon. Both went up against Russia and failed. Interesting to see that EU/NATO appears hell-bent on repeating their mistake
---

And thats where all the Democrat and NATO saber rattling fits into the puzzle - great point

Blogger Azimus August 05, 2016 5:33 PM  

360 August 05, 2016 11:46 AM
I have been thinking about the EU benefiting Europe question. There has not been a European-wide conflict since the EU's formation. Is this not a result of the EU system? The old alliance system for WWI and WWII seemed to be the predicate for both wars and the new EU system seems to have curbed that a bit.


By this fallacious measure the Warsaw Pact was also good for Europe. Post hoc ergo propter hoc? I'm not a logic expert, but it seems like it.

Blogger Were-Puppy August 05, 2016 5:38 PM  

@94 Student in Blue

How can a national business compete with a multinational one ?

China has an interesting way of going about it.

If you want to have any access to their markets, you *have* to have a local partner/sponsor that it goes through.
---

Walmart was doing the same thing in the 2000s. Anyone wanted to sell through Walmart had to put an office somewhere in Bentonville, AR.

The China part was interesting, in order for them to put a store in China, they had to make an office in each store for a China Commie representative.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash August 05, 2016 5:44 PM  

MK wrote:Thanks for the example of craft breweries. Coffee roasting is another case of local business successfully competing against global giants.

Years ago I was a member of SAGE. There was, at the time, an initiative to develop a model curriculum for the training and certification of system administrators.

The leadership was stunned by the vehemence and adamancy of the membership in rejecting the proposal. The commonest objection was "If these rules had been in place when I started in the business, I would never have been able to become a system administrator."

So long as people think that's a bad thing, we have hope. When they think "These rules will make it harder for others to enter my market, so let's implement them" the free market is doomed.

Anonymous Jonny Caustic August 05, 2016 5:46 PM  

360: "There has not been a European-wide conflict since the EU's formation. Is this not a result of the EU system?"

VD: "No, it is the result of a) 70 years of American military occupation and b) nuclear weapons."

I would add that it's also a result of those Europeans with memories of the World Wars struggling mightily to make sure nothing like that ever happens again. But it's not the EU that has this effect; it's the presence of many vigilant survivors in positions of influence. As the last of them die off and their restraining wisdom vanishes, the stage is set for a new cataclysm.

Blogger G-S. August 05, 2016 5:48 PM  

Nationalism poses a problem because it signals leadership won't play well with other countries leaders. It (generally) is a sign of vilifying those from elsewhere. Yes, sometimes a country needs to retrench, but America isn't showing that currently, contrary to alt-right/conservative suggestion. This is not Zimbabwe or even Spain. Fear, in the face of no real threat, is just self-destructive. When tanks come to America from an invading force, then America has reason to fear - otherwise the attack is someone seeking infamy.

Blogger Were-Puppy August 05, 2016 5:54 PM  

a) Someone has their head buried in the sand.
b) Someone has their head buried in their ass.
c) Both

Anonymous andon August 05, 2016 6:02 PM  

let me guess, its a "grave risk" to their pocketbook

Blogger Snidely Whiplash August 05, 2016 6:03 PM  

G-S. wrote:Nationalism poses a problem because it signals leadership won't play well with other countries leaders.
Oh, bullshit. Every country in the world outside the US, Canada and Germany is nationalist. Does anybody think that Japan "Won't play well with others"?

It (generally) is a sign of vilifying those from elsewhere.
What's wrong with that?

Yes, sometimes a country needs to retrench, but America isn't showing that currently, contrary to alt-right/conservative suggestion.
Our population is being replaced with ignorant mestizos from Mexico, savages from the Ummah, and tribalists from Africa.
But The Train Is Fine! There's no problem! Until they have a voting majority, then you're fucked.
But everything is FINE!

This is not Zimbabwe or even Spain. Fear, in the face of no real threat, is just self-destructive.
We are on the diving board above $15 trillion in debt. The rule of law has been abolished for those in the political class. If nothing is done about immigration, our country will have been fundamentally abolished and replaced with an even crappier version of Guatemala. Just because you refuse to see the threat doesn't mean it's non-existant. It means you're a fool, or one of the (((class))) that has been agitating for this for 75 years.

When tanks come to America from an invading force, then America has reason to fear - otherwise the attack is someone seeking infamy.
The tanks are already here. The invading force is already here. All it takes is a demographic tipping point to put them together. MAny here think that has already happened. Some of us are optimists.
You're just a globalist cuck.
Go live in your enclave, as long as they let you.

Anonymous andon August 05, 2016 6:19 PM  

44. Anonymous Bell Worthington August 05, 2016 12:56 PM
"disregard for constitutional norms." This is where you can tell the Economist goes beyond shilling into flat out lying. They make it sound as if Poland/Hungary have thrown out free speech and sent critics to the gulag.


upside down world. Poland, Hungary etc are the only ones who still care what their citizens think

Anonymous bgkb August 05, 2016 6:26 PM  

Bath House Barry pushes to have DHS in charge of election.
http://www.blacklistednews.com/DHS_to_run_elections%2C_wants_voting_classified_as_%E2%80%9Ccritical_infrastructure%22/53231/0/38/38/Y/M.html

"“We should carefully consider whether our election system, our election process is critical infrastructure, like the financial sector, like the power grid,” DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson told reporters. “There’s a vital national interest in our electoral process.”"

A lot of us who use Disqus at BB have taken the little verified check mark and tag, and modified it to be a checkmark and say Nationalist instead.

How do you do that? I was banned from BB likely by Benji Shapiro himself.

let me guess, its a "grave risk" to their pocketbook

$100millio (((Ponzi))) scheme detected. http://www.9news.com.au/national/2016/08/04/19/46/death-of-financial-whiz-on-queensland-beach-exposes-suspected-ponzi-scheme

Blogger TontoBubbaGoldstein August 05, 2016 8:29 PM  

Were-Puppy wrote


Sooner or later, Malthus will be proved correct and Keynes will be proved wrong; probably at the same time

Anonymous liljoe August 05, 2016 8:40 PM  

Trump just endorsed Paul Ryan and Jpohn McCain, further evidence his campaign has been hijacked by the neocons. say it isn't so....

Blogger Sevron August 05, 2016 8:51 PM  

OMG it's all ogre you guys! WTF I hate Trump now!

Anonymous liljoe August 05, 2016 8:57 PM  

no reason to hate the guy. he's just more controlled opposition, like Bernie.

I was just hoping one of the more intelligent readers of this blog could explain how this move makes sense for Trump.

Anonymous andon August 05, 2016 9:31 PM  

doesn't make sense but he was prob forced to.

I have no use for either mccain or ryan

Anonymous liljoe August 05, 2016 9:39 PM  

forced by whom? this is the problem for me.

by endorsing those clowns, a good chunk of the monster vote may start looking at Jill Stein or not voting

Anonymous Spinrad's Agent August 05, 2016 10:19 PM  

I haven't read the Economist for years and am heartened to see it maintaining the same preposterously patronizing tone I remembered.

The current editor-in-chief is a woman who worked on structural adjustment programs in Africa as an IMF vampire and attends Bilderberg conferences. In a sane world she'd be behind bars. Or better.

Anonymous andon August 05, 2016 10:27 PM  

@ #116 - liljoe - he was prob forced by repubs - "if you don't endorse ryan and mccain then these 10 repubs will speak out against you on khan, etc"

something like that

Anonymous liljoe August 05, 2016 10:41 PM  

he should've called that bluff. these cucky Rs are on the way out.

here's to Nehlen defeating the Fink on Tuesday...cheers

Blogger Leo Little Book in Shenzhen August 06, 2016 1:47 AM  

by endorsing those clowns

One has to get elected before ruling.

Blame America for making these clowns his teammates.

Anonymous Shut up rabbit August 06, 2016 2:01 AM  

The Economist is the mouthpiece of (((LSE))), ground zero for the plague of cultural marxism. I can picture the discussions in the office writing this:

"Tarquin darling, what can we do to scare those straight white males who are trying to save civilization?"
"Let's say nationalism is worse than communism!"
"But communism is wonderful, we'll get it right this time and we'll finally get to tell all those bullies what to do."
"I know my occasional backdoor lover but it is just a rhetorical device to scare the stupid straight white males, they are terrified of our holy creed of universal equality of outcome (and death for those who dare to be unequal)."

Anonymous Shut up rabbit August 06, 2016 2:17 AM  

pyrrhus wrote:South of France has a lot of surly looking moslems and more than a few African men....

It's not just the South but all of France - demographic suicide is proceeding at a pace throughout the country (although it's illegal to measure the statistics).

Vile puppet-traitor Valls earmarked billions of euros recently to enforce the gift of diversity to those quaint, little French villages which will soon be as unrecognizably European as Marseille, Lille, the Parisian suburbs and the other occupied, former French territories already are.

France has the highest taxes in EU, with most of it being paid to a burgeoning, unappreciative, generational welfare class. We'll soon see the tipping point where the working whites can no longer support the parasitic migrants and their disgusting enablers in the bloated government.

Blogger dfordoom August 06, 2016 2:22 AM  

3. Napoleon 12pdr

That doesn't mean the national culture is perfect, it doesn't mean other cultures are worthless...

That's something we need to emphasise. You can be a nationalist and still have the greatest respect and admiration for other cultures. In fact nationalists have more respect for other cultures than the globalists do. We want other cultures to survive and thrive. We know that the only way any of these other cultures can survive is within their own countries.

If you're a nationalist then logically you believe in nationalism for everybody. I'm an Australian nationalist and I support nationalism for Poland, for France, for China, for Bolivia, for Russia, for Iran, for everyone.

Globalism and multi-culturalism are in fact the deadly enemies of diversity. Globalism kills diversity. True diversity requires nationalism.

Anonymous Shut up rabbit August 06, 2016 2:40 AM  

Robert Divinity wrote:Ironically, the globalists are the most zealous utopians since--the communists.



Almost as if they are the same people...

What the useful idiots never grasp is that communism/socialism has nothing to do with fairness or equality for the proles, its simply the easiest way for the elites to manage them, entrench their position over them and take even more of their stuff.

It's hilarious to watch the middle-class so called "intellectuals" touting the murderous creed, always thinking that somehow that they'll be one of the ones running it, not just one of its countless, nameless victims. Absolutely hilarious.

Blogger dfordoom August 06, 2016 2:49 AM  

@45. Jakeithus

In the Netherlands and Sweden, centrist parties have banded together to keep out nationalists.

The problem with that is that it reveals the truth - that all the mainstream political parties are in fact the same party. It reveals the truth that democracy is nothing but a sham.

Which means that voters who are unhappy will end up having only one alternative - the nationalist parties. If you want a genuine change of government you can only get it by voting for the nationalist parties.

As a long-term strategy for the globalists it's very dangerous. The one thing they've been determined to do is to make sure that no-one notices that democracy is an illusion.

Blogger Bob Loblaw August 06, 2016 3:12 AM  

Oh, bullshit. Every country in the world outside the US, Canada and Germany is nationalist. Does anybody think that Japan "Won't play well with others"?

Well, there is precedent. China keeps pushing them around, and eventually there will be a response.

Anonymous Frankenstein McBadperson August 06, 2016 4:21 AM  

@105

Wins the internet for stupid.

Aaagh!! The stupid!! It burns! It burns!

Anonymous SciVo August 06, 2016 4:43 AM  

G-S. wrote:Nationalism poses a problem because it signals leadership won't play well with other countries leaders.

That is precisely backwards. You can't have internationalism without nationalism. Globalists have no respect for boundaries, and feel entitled to tell the whole world what to do, which is a recipe for war.

Anonymous Eric the Red August 06, 2016 6:40 AM  

Isn't it interesting that the globalists always immediately revert to hyperbolic scaremongering: "fascist", "xenophobia", "disregard for constitutional norms" (whatever that means), "nazi", "islamophobic", and the list goes on and on.

They are unable or unwilling to comprehend that nationalism can also mean a healthy respect for each others' cultures and national boundaries. Their arguments are based on a logical error, and they should be called on it.

Meanwhile, the disastrous real-world results of their globalist policies are everywhere for all to see.

Anonymous Avalanche August 06, 2016 8:53 AM  

@19 "(It also seems to me that people do not tend to buy ethnic, but buy the best and cheapest products.)"

Nah, it turns out that's mostly a White thing too! 'Testing' has shown, for example, that blacks (that's what they tested, when I read the stuff a decade ago) will buy products 'sold' to them by black actors in advertising, but not nearly as much by White actors. WHITES will buy based on the product quality, value, and price; they don't notice or care what race is used to advertise it!

Anonymous Fed up with BRA August 06, 2016 12:49 PM  

Avalanche wrote:WHITES will buy based on the product quality, value, and price; they don't notice or care what race is used to advertise it!
I used to just throw Capital One card offers in my shredder. I have started returning them with notes like "Market to the black people your ad company loves so much."

Blogger Zen Trader August 06, 2016 1:21 PM  

Free trade is a valid concept intranationally, and invalid internationally. What is immensely beneficial in a setting where you have one group of people playing by the same rules falls apart when you move to a setting where wildly disparate groups play by wildly disparate rules.

For example, for all the valid criticism hurled at American car makers in the past, the fact remains that Eastern currency manipulation places them at a significant disadvantage before the first punch is thrown. Also, Japanese and Korean car companies enjoy a level of government support that our companies do not. These situations are why tariffs exist, and where they can be used appropriately.

Blogger Robert Divinity August 06, 2016 2:20 PM  

Nationalism poses a problem because it signals leadership won't play well with other countries leaders.

In the event you haven't noticed, the communists/transnational utopians have set the entire world on fire. It seems the conflagration from the Middle East to the South China Sea would be too hot to miss.

It (generally) is a sign of vilifying those from elsewhere.

Nationalism generally is a sign of cultural self-confidence. The communists/transnational utopians tend to start the wars.

Yes, sometimes a country needs to retrench, but America isn't showing that currently, contrary to alt-right/conservative suggestion.

You really have to have your head up your ass not to notice the country is imploding at a rapid rate.

This is not Zimbabwe or even Spain.

It is financially worse off than either, which will become rapidly obvious as defaults begin and credit is cut off to the Banana Empire.

Fear, in the face of no real threat, is just self-destructive.

Ignoring reality trumps even irrational fear.

When tanks come to America from an invading force, then America has reason to fear - otherwise the attack is someone seeking infamy.

They are here. The odds are your local police have helicopters and APV's that frequently buzz overhead or rumble through the street. If you think they are to keep you safe, Davos Man has done his work.

This gets my vote as the dumbest comment I've encountered here thus far unless this guy does parody and satire. The level of cluelessness is astonishing and frightening.

Blogger Robert Divinity August 06, 2016 2:31 PM  

Almost as if they are the same people...

You obviously are right. The neocons have blatantly Marxist roots, and in the Academy some of the biggest proponents of transnational utopians were communists throughout the Cold War.

The story changes but the antagonists remain stable and just reappear in different monster costumes. The utopian endings all tend to be same as well: fire and blood.

Anonymous Eric the Red August 06, 2016 7:33 PM  

@129...

Globalist logical fallacy is [ASNEPO]: The absence of something (globalism) is not equal to the presence of its opposite (xenophobia).

Blogger CM August 07, 2016 7:31 AM  

Nationalism doesn't start wars.

Imperialism starts wars.

I have been reliably informed that WE started the Middle East conflict. That wasn't nationalism. That was soft Imperialism. Globalism is soft Imperialism.

Blogger Zen Trader August 07, 2016 2:12 PM  

Were-Puppy wrote:My Silent Gen relative still goes on and on about how the world is over populated.

Oh, but it is. You don't see it because you don't live in one of the overpopulated regions. Basically, most black or brown countries are way overpopulated as it is, with Africa ready to undergo another population explosion.

The problem with this is mostly down to food production. We've had to do increasingly fucked up things to our environment to keep up with the pace of population growth, and we're rapidly hitting a wall. Basically, the good and marginal farmland is all being utilized.

The problem isn't that the global elites want less people, the problem is that they have focused on the wrong population because nobody else will listen.

Don't listen to people that claim we can put tens of billions more on the planet. First, visit India. Then, remember that for every person you need a certain amount of farmland and resources to support them in a decent lifestyle.

Blogger kurt9 August 07, 2016 11:31 PM  

The REAL reason why globalization and free trade will diminish (but not disappear) over time:

http://warontherocks.com/2016/08/the-end-of-globalization-the-international-security-implications/

Hint: its the fracking shale revolution combined with automated manufacturing (3-D printing, robotics, etc.).

I know some of you guys poo-poo advanced technology in here. However, advanced technology IS the necessary key to the kind of self-sufficient nationalism you guys advocate here.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts