Category: EU

Introducing Silk Road News

More Asian perfidy.

More in depth analyses of the threat posed by Asians to the existence and well-being of Europeans are forthcoming. But I also would like to continue my shorter analyses of currents events and history to demonstrate the racial, culture, and economic incompatibility of Europeans and Asians. That will now have the “byline” of “Silk Road News.”

Note that trouble caused by devious Chinese frauds causes a new rift among Europeans, with Britain being economically damaged by their dealings with Chinese scammers.

Britain owes the European Union budget two billion euros after turning a blind eye to a major scam by Chinese importers, the EU’s fraud office said on Wednesday…

…OLAF said that “despite repeated efforts and in contrast to the actions taken by several other member states to fight against these fraudsters,” the scam in Britain continued to grow.

The office said that the scheme also cost other EU countries — such as France, Germany, Spain and Italy — 3.2 billion euros in lost national value-added-tax revenue.

The fraudsters involved “are in fact organised crime groups whose actions affect the entire EU; they operate in criminal networks active across the EU,” OLAF said.

The Asian contribution to Europe’s economy: fraud and organized crime. Not to mention copyright infringement and flooding the market with cheap and shoddy products.

Brexit should not affect trade between Britain and the EU, which should be increased at the expense of British-Asian trade.  And then there’s Russia. Increased trade and economic cooperation between Britain and Russia can benefit both parties.  Britain can have a market for their finished goods and access to Russian raw materials (particularly from the Russian Far East, resources previously ignored by the Asiatic aboriginals and now properly exploited by Slavic initiative).  Russia can use British help to more fully develop the Russian Far East, help which can make superfluous the devious Chinamen infiltrating in.  A win-win for the White race – which should be supported by all White racial nationalists.

It is also unfair for the British taxpayer to have to foot the bill for this Asiatic corruption.  My suggestion is that the UK government should seize the assets of “British Asians” – particularly East Asians – and use the funds so recovered to pay this two billion euro fine. That would be a fair and reasonable settling of accounts.  

There is historical precedent: the German government imposed a collective fine on the “German Jewish” community after the vom Rath killing; the principle is the same.  You would think that a “movement” so obsessed with praising the virtues of the Hitler regime would find this solution to Britain’s Asian-caused dilemma quite just and satisfying.

A French zoo rhino had to die because of bizarre Asiatic superstition:

A rhino has been shot dead by poachers who broke into a zoo and sliced its horn off with a chainsaw.

Four-year-old Vince was found dead by one of his keepers at Thoiry zoo, near Paris, on Tuesday morning.

Who is responsible for killing rhinos for their horns?

Southern African countries are battling increased poaching levels as organised gangs from mainly Asian countries try to meet the growing demand from countries such as Vietnam and China.

Whites try to preserve endangered species.  Asians slaughter them.  

The Silk Road in history: bringing death and suffering to the peoples of Europe.

Alt Right Forever?

Analysis of Spencer video.

Basically I agree with most of what Spencer says here.

A few points:

1. I’m no fan of the Alt Right, for reasons outlined numerous times on this blog, and the “branding” arguments and semantic debates about naming this precinct of Der Movement leave me cold.  That said, Spencer makes reasonable points in this brief video.

2. On the one hand, what happened at the conference was not optimal, and I’ve written as much.  But some folks are getting carried away with their reaction, being a bit hysterical.  It was regrettable, but not fatal.  It really isn’t that big of a deal.  Acknowledge error (no need for “apology”) and more forward.  Hopefully something was learned here.  But the idea that the “Alt Right brand” (such as it is) has been “damaged beyond repair” is simply ridiculous. If people are so easily discouraged by that, then they are useless for any serious sort of political activism.  A more important issue is having security for the meetings, doing so with the reality of the open hostility of the System and its police forces (e.g., leftist thugs can attack with impunity; rightest self-defense would likely be criminalized).

3. Alt Right a household name?  Perhaps that’s going too far, but I was recently surprised when a female of my acquaintance asked me: “What’s the Alt Right?  Can you explain it to me?”  Now, that was in response, I later learned, to an article about Bannon and not Spencer, but still….

4. Spencer’s critique of Ramzpaul was spot-on.  I listened to RZP’s own video, there was the implication of the same attitude that greeted Ronnie Raygun’s 1980 election – ‘we won, so no need for any more radical activism.”  Sigh.  That’s the wages of “mainstreaming.”  And RZP’s statements about The Daily Stormer being an ADL False Flag – what can one say? That’s typical “movement” drama, and that applies regardless of whether or not the accusation is true.  Constant “movement” freakishness.

5. Spencer’s comments about the self-determination of small nations was a very effective riposte to the ethnonationalist faction.  The “Velvet Divorce” of the Czechs and Slovaks worked out with NATO and the EU in the background, and Big Daddy America and its nuclear arsenal and superpower status backing ostensible small nation sovereignty (but are any of these nations truly sovereign?).  In the absence of these larger unit power structures, why would anyone take small nations with populations in the low millions seriously?  Why would anyone take any single European nation seriously (apart from the nuclear arsenals of the UK and France, and only the French force is truly independent; putting aside whether or not you want to consider Russia as “European” as well).  Why should the Chinese take the Czechs and Czech sovereignty seriously apart from Czech membership in supra-national organizations?  This is NOT a call for any sort of rigid empire or Euro-panmixia, nor a call for any nation to give up its uniqueness or internal rule.  But facts are facts: in a world of a clash of civilizations, smaller nations alone have no viability on the world stage whatsoever.  They may delude themselves that they do, but they really do not, and eventually that reality will catch up to them.

A Disheartening Comments Thread

Ignoring a third way.

I have already discussed my disagreement with Greg Johnson with respect to this post.

The other comments in the post are equally disheartening. I have broad sympathy (but certain NOT total agreement) with the positions of Bill Baillie, but he makes poor, self-defeating arguments in support of his positions.  He advocates for a too-integrated transnational state, he makes the self-destructive “all Europeans are fungible” argument (thus ignoring damage from intra-European migration), and he opens himself up to criticism that he is a self-interested ethnic.

On the other hand, “AE” takes the traditional “movement” view that there is no difference between migration from Ireland, Italy, and Poland and that from the Third World; further, this commentator laments the effect that immigration from those countries had in displacing the colonial stock in America while – also consistent with Der Movement – curiously omitting the displacing effects of German and Scandinavian immigration, a topic that the non-tawny Ben Franklin had some opinions about.

Is there a “third way” beyond these more typical opposing positions?  Yes, there is, but in addressing Der Movement but I might as well have talked to the wind for all the heed it paid me  (*).

*Apologies to Percy Alleline/John Le Carre.

White American Identity?

Reaction to Counter-Currents essay.

Overall this is reasonable, but I have two criticisms, the first minor and the second major:

The same can be said of the Spanish-speaking peoples of the Southern Cone of South America…

Some of whom are unmixed Europeans, but many of whom are actually mestizos passing themselves off as “European.”

White Nationalism does not, however, imply grandiose notions like a politically unified white imperium, which could only be imposed by violence and maintained by oppression and the erasure of distinct white identities. Nationalism is opposed to all forms of imperialism, even white imperialism — especially white imperialism, since imperialism is worse at the expense of fellow whites than non-whites.

This is utter nonsense.  A “White Imperium” can be an association similar to that of pre-Civil War America, in which distinct states, each with their own identities and influence (some – e.g., Virginia, New York, Massachusetts – more than others) as well as a healthy degree of self-governance, came together, voluntarily, in an American Union that had overarching, but not total, political control of the territory. Things went awry with the Civil War no doubt, but whose bright idea was it to bring Negroes to America? Ethnonationalism on the other hand blessed us with the two world wars that wrecked the White world, and which brought to us the universalist “European” (sic) Union as a reaction.

It does not have to be a choice between pan-European nationalism and ethnonationalism.  It could be both at the same time, but in the order of importance as listed.

Finally, not a criticism, but what’s with the “horror” of the White ethnic blending in America? It has benefits as well as costs.  In any case, it is more or less inevitable and may in fact produce, over time, some useful stabilized breeds of Whites, extending the diversity of European man – as long as the original stocks are maintained at least in Europe.  That last caveat demands that any “White Imperium” absolutely must include maintenance of internal national borders and restriction of migration across those national boundaries.

Arrogant Asians and Brexit

Typically breathtaking Asian arrogance.

In a recent issue of Science (a leading scientific journal with a definite leftist slant), there was an anti-Brexit article, on how Brexit is casting a “pall” on British science.  Well, all no surprise, but what caught my attention was the photograph accompanying the article.  The picture showed two “young pro-EU campaigners” protesting Brexit in London by holding up a sign saying: YOU STOLE OUR FUTURE.

Who were these protesters?  A South Asian female and an East Asian female.  Well then! That basically summarizes the problem with the EU, doesn’t it – the EU being an organization that promotes the interests of everyone in Europe except for native Europeans.  Maybe, just maybe, native Europeans want to determine their own destinies, without pushy aliens dictating to them and attempting to shame them.

The arrogance of those two female coloreds is breathtaking.  These invaders – who are not racially or culturally European, do not belong in Europe, and whose presence there is actually stealing the future from native Europeans and their posterity – have the goddamn nerve to whine that their futures are being “stolen” by the dastardly indigenous people of Britain who had the temerity to stand up for their own interests.  These Asians have chutzpah as the Jews would say, or, more vulgarly, “they have big balls.”

Here’s some advice to these invasive filth: you can take back your futures by going back where you (or your invading ancestors) came from, and leave native Europeans the right to their own future in their own homelands, thank you very much.

Asians – a people whose existential meaning is hatred of Whites.