“the strategy of deliberately constructing a parallel state from the ground up”
This is exactly like the approach in proper anarchism, except they would say building the new “society” within the shell of the old, given that the state per se is understood as an apparatus of violence. Of course, there’s also a strong resonance here with Havel’s ideas about resistance.
Building the new society within the shell of the old is classical Marxist language -- and its true, Marxists shared a lot of common origins with anarchists, working the same milieus, attending many of the same congresses and conferences. Leninists, not so much -- I've heard something more like building the new society on the ashes of the old. That tends to be unreliable as to the net results achieved, but then, so is anarchism.
Many years ago, God set things in a way that I was able to be with a dear friend of mine as his grandmother (who, for sad reasons, was more like his mother) was dying. She lay in hospital for a bit more than two weeks in a coma, and it was questionable whether she was "there" most of that time. My friend and I sat with her the last night she spent on this earth, and I had a very strong sense that she was there then, and she was hanging on just long enough for my friend to come to grips with the fact that it was time for her to go. We just don't know what's going on when people are in states like that, but hopefully this time your friend had was to his benefit and helped bring him closer to God.
Glad to hear the conference was able to be held. I’m sitting here watching Jeopardy & there’s a guy on named Jeff who named his son Ignatius because his favorite book is A Confederacy of Dunces! Also said he & his wife like Iggy Pop & they’re Catholic & like St Ignatius Loyola. I’m rooting for him!
>>>Conservatism has become mostly about whiners and grifters
I think that this describes what is the Elites’ approved, ostensible leftism and liberalism are. Actually, I should say that about most of the political class and the system of NGOs supporting it regardless of whatever the stated ideologies are.
Much as corporations make their money, not by providing a better or less expensive product or service, but by stock buybacks and selling off bits the business until it’s all gone down while lying cheating all the while. All for the immediate cash that they can steal. Investment, research, training employees, paying for better employees or better products are all ignored.
The various organizations in politics, education, the old line charities like the Red Cross and perhaps even in religion are all the same: the management want to make money and to perdition with anything or anyone else and regardless of the stated purpose of the organization. When everything from the mayor’s office to the local sewage plant to my college diploma to my soul are all up for sale to the highest (corporate) bidder, how can anything work? I should just have the winning bidders tattoo their advertising on my body. Maybe I can get something to help pay for my ever increasing food, rent, and power.
No, we don’t have liberal or conservative parties, we have money making grifts; it’s turtles all the way down.
‘Canceled’ for Protesting Cancel Culture, Europe’s Right-Wingers Rejoice
This might be a world record for most concentrated lies in a single headline, coming from our Paper of Record.
"Cancelled"? Showing up to a conference to find it ringed by police and the govt attempting to shut it down (in real time) is to "cancelled" what an amputation is to wart removal. This was by no means any type of "cancelling" but a direct governmental assault on the rights of free speech, thought and assembly (things liberals used to defend);
"for Protesting Cancel Culture"? Is this what Conservatism (in all its flavors) looks like in the minds of our Brahmin Left? Just another round of Culture War dodgeball? So I guess "cancel culture" is real now, after a decade of liberals gaslighting about it and saying it was just a fever dream of Fox News?
"Europe’s Right-Wingers"? Does everyone opposed to Social Justice Inc. have to be right-wing? No more libertarians, classic liberals, skeptics etc? Everyone has to wear the same label so the readership will be made aware of the moral pollution here and know to hold their noses and ears? This is how free thought and fair-play discourse die.
"Rejoice"? To be locked inside or outside a venue you traveled to and to protest is to "Rejoice"? So the liberals get caught with their hands in Orwell's cookie jar and the lesson here is how happy it makes conservatives? This alone shows you how embarrassingly infantile our discourse has become—if those evil NatCons are rejoicing, it only proves how right we were all along!
The liberal class imagines themselves locked in a Holy War against a whole army of "far right" extremists, nationalists, Deplorables etc, but the truth is no one has inflicted any wounds as devastating as the ones they've inflicted upon themselves. Almost 10 years after the Orange One came down his golden escalator and the tantrum is not close to ending. In their desperate quest to destroy all their enemies the one thing that will be definitely destroyed is the MSM's claims of credibility, veracity, authority. May the roof come down on their heads as soon as possible...
I wish the American Solidarity Party would strategize along the lines of N.S. Lyons' advice. If they could do it without losing their ethos, that would be SO good.
Even though I questioned Hazony's sincerity being that he self identifies as a Jewish Nationalist (that is to say, a Zionist) from a nation that has benefited greatly to it's relationship with, let's just call it "The Empire" (that is the the Global Machine of theTransatlanticist Elites who created Israel in the first place), I maintain an open mind. I have much respect for Viktor Orban, he's basically the best in the West right now. I'm glad it looks like Slovakia is taking Orban's independent stance now too albeit from the populist left (unfortunately the Globalists are back in power in Poland and are looking to punish the Catholic Nationalist/Populists who dared to challenge their stranglehold. The Law& Justice Party can blame themselves for that for embroiling Poland in the Ukraine War).
I'll tell you how to beat The Empire. You become completely self sufficient, self sustaining and thus independent of The Empire. Whatever you rely on the Empire for (be it electricity, petrol, money, water, food, etc.) then they have power and control over you. To beat the Empire you have to think and act like a rebel in occupied territory. Yes creating parallel institutions (even underground if need be) is a necessity. Access to food and water is a necessity. You can't beat the Empire at it's own game. That's why I've come to the conclusion that we can go through the machinations of elections and support "the best candidate" even though year after year it becomes more evident that the Regime wins no matter who you vote for. I'm starting to suspect they (The Regime of The Empire) might have even gotten to Trump. The Regime itself isn't monolithic. As I said yesterday they are neither left nor right. They will and have used anybody that they can coerce, blackmail or bribe to do their bidding. That's why I'm starting to believe anything short of revolution at this point is absolutely futile because any movement you start The Regime will infiltrate, corrupt and co-opt.
Theodore Iacobuzio: Agreed, but he won't be able to give it a rest. While 'anti-Semite' is often used to mean 'someone who hates Jews', it's much better understood as a person who may have no hostility to Jews as individuals, but nevertheless sees the Sinister Hand of International Jewry at the root of everything they hate and fear. It's noticeable that the classic anti-Semite can't refrain from introducing their phobia (it is a phobia, in the sense of 'an irrational fear') into every discussion, however far removed from the original topic it may be. There are a couple of other regular contributors to this list who fall under the same heading.
"a person who may have no hostility to Jews as individuals, but nevertheless sees the Sinister Hand of International Jewry at the root of everything they hate and fear"
Like Dostoevsky, unfortunately: as far as I know, he had no personal hostility to individual Jews, but to him "Jewish" was synonymous with modern European secularism, the antithesis of the Russian tradition. He was right to criticize the tendency he did, but totally bizarre in identifying it as Jewish.
True—I meant intellectually bizarre, even if it was par for the historical course.
Rasputin was ahead of his time and actually advocated for the rights of Jews within Russia. Indeed, that might have contributed to people thinking he was a traitor and wanting to kill him.
Dosty was very strongly anti-Roman Catholic as well, but his biographer puts a lot of that down to the fact that the only Catholics he had any real experience with were the French, and he painted all RC's in that light. I know nothing about 19th C. French Catholicism so I can't speak to those particulars.
I've seen a claim that Rasputin openly seeking to persuade the Tsar to eliminate the last of Russia's anti Jewish laws was Prince Yusopov's motive in the assassination.
Seriously? I read, I think, seven of his books and did not see this at all. I did not know, and I am kind of shocked, because I have such a high opinion of Doestoevsky. I trust you that this true but I wonder where you saw this?
It doesn't show up in his novels, but he is very clear about his views in his journals, published as *A Writer's Diary*. Again, it had to do with his association of the Jews with secularism (opposed to what he might call "the intrinsic religiosity of the Russian soul"), so he considered it as a philosophical point rather than a matter of racial animus per se. But of course that's still pretty bad.
Thanks, Setuh. Is the same true of Tolstly? And....I take it that he was only against non-religious Jews and he knew that not all Jews were non-religious? I'm not sure why he was not also against non-religious Russians.
Well, he sort of was but not in the way you appear to say he was against secular Jews.
Yes I have and I'm skeptical as to it's authenticity, however it fascinating to read. I've always said if it was a forgery it was the most prophetic forgery ever written and if you substituted Jew for Globalist nobody here on these comment blogs would disagree that everything written in the Protocols on how to destroy Christendom and the Western nations and peoples came to pass.
I think you should read it for yourself and come to your own conclusions. I read it and I'm not sure if it was a forgery or not, but a lot of the plans made in it were carried out whether that was done as a conspiracy of a group of Elitist Jews or not. You should read it. You can read Mein Kampf and not be a Nazi. You can read the communist manifesto and not be a communist.
Well, I've been accused of such in these boxes, and I trust you're not talking about me: skepticism regarding what the Israelis get up to doesn't in my view constitute anything but an opinion, though certain writers on X and elsewhere would disagree.
If one believed that our own government is corrupt in the usual manner of most governments but that the Israeli government can uniquely do no wrong, then well, I'd consider that to be an irrational view. A Jewish state is still a state.
That's a great insight about the anti - Semite's paranoid inability to refrain from foisting his obsession onto everything. If rain forces postponement of the ballgame, it's the fault of some Jew somewhere.
Inasmuch as there never in history was a Kingdom of Palestine, "Palestinians" claim to a state fall flat. But shame on Jews for thinking they have a claim to that land! I wonder where they could have gotten that notion?
Everytime I see a comment which begins as J Alexander's does, my only question is whether I want to bother reading it. He claims to be a Christian, and there is no ingratitude to compare with that of a Christian who is an anti - Semite.
No. I said so, say so, explicitly. I think the "no daylight" business is nonsense on stilts. But bringing up Hazony's "Zionism" in the context of the NCC makes me want to say what I said: give it a rest.
Theodore, I see you sent me a message. But Substack won't let me sign in to see it. I am not surprised by this, because I rarely have any such thing come off easily for me. Almost always, I'm impeded by something.
They don't recognize me. They won't allow my username. They won't let me sign in with Google. Something. Almost every time.
So being cynical towards the secular state of Israel and the Israeli lobby means I'm an "Anti-Semite". Let just say to be fair I don't want any foreign nation deciding the policies of my government, that doesn't make me a Jew hater that makes me a Nationalist and a Patriot. I was explaining this to JPN yesterday. I'm of Mexican heritage and I don't like to see Mexican flags in my country unless their flown side by side the Old Glory. Same with the Palestinian flag. I like Palestinians. I am sympathetic to the suffering of the Palestinian people but if you're going to fly a Palestinian flag I'm protest to US foreign policy while living in America there needs to be an American flag with it. And no we don't need what the GOP just rubber stamped which is that FISA Bill authorizing more warrantless surveillance and no we don't need Congress making pointless declarations to prove their Israeli bootlicking credentials by condemning the slogan, "River to the Sea" as Anti-Semitic. That's not the role of Congress to lock Israeli boots, especially when Netanyahu himself says Israel needs to control the territory from "The River to the Sea", meaning he wants to use the Israeli military to carve out a Greater Israel out of Lebanon and Syria and.maybe even Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. AIPAC owns our Government in Washington lock stock and barrel and you have no problem with that Bobby?
In fairness to you, I recognize that you belong to a Church which, as far as I understand Eastern Orthodox eschatology, doesn't believe there is any role for a national Israel in the coming Kingdom of Christ. I believe in premillenial eschatology, which holds that Israel does indeed have a glorious future as a nation, a nation of Jews who have become believers in Jesus Christ. I think there is a decisive weight of evidence in Romans 9 - 11 that this is true.
No, J. Alexander, I do not believe you are a Nazi, and yes, I'm well aware of Israel's strongly secular current culture, and no, I do not think the government of Israel ought to be immune to reproach.
As for AIPAC, better them than CAIR. I wish you would start to consider that Israel is a vital national interest of ours. It's an ally. Israel has nukes and that doesn't scare me. The prospect of Iran's getting nukes should scare the crap out of everyone. I think that the United States should do everything it can to aid and abet the Israelis in destroying Iran's nuclear research and development.
It should be eloquent as a demonstration of what the Arab states think of the Iranians that the Saudis and the Jordanians were part of the Israeli fight against the Iranian missiles last Saturday.
There are no "Palestinian people" because there never was a Kingdom of Palestine. As I understand matters, those people are essentially Egyptian. Ask yourself why Egypt doesn't want them.
As for Gaza, what should the Israelis do, do you think? I'd like to hear your ideas. Have you seen prewar photos of the Gazan beaches? There is in my view great merit to the idea that twenty years ago, the Gazans were given territory they could have made an Arab Singapore of. All they could think to do was to plan to wipe out Jews.
And I thought it was wonderful of you to say something, Sue. I'd been trying to just ignore it - don't respond, don't put a like, just skip whatever it says as soon as it is skimmed and the Z-word appears. - but yes, it's out of hand ,as you said, pretty much every post.
Linda, I don't use Zionist as a slur. I use it as a title. It's a title that Zionists use themselves. Hazony uses it himself. It is a political ideology. Theodore Herzl is the godfather of Zionism.
Zionism is the belief that the Jews should have a homeland. If you are anti-Zionist then you believe the nation of Israel should be ended. Others explained things very well above, so this will not be a long post. I was raised as a Protestant Zionist from childhood. I am still a Zionist. And I hope you will clarify that this revolution you think should happen will not include violence on your part.
(btw, I was meeting with a Mexican citizen who is a new friend of mine this evening and I spent the greater part of my teaching career teaching student in Arizona who were from, mainly, Mexico, i.e., they or their parents were born there.)
You said <<Yes because I don't trust Israelis. I don't trust Turks either but I'm sure none of you have a problem with that because Turks are Muslims>>. This means you claim none of us trust Muslims, which is completely false.
I was speaking for myself personally when I said I don't trust Israelis or Turks and I was not talking about regular Israelis or Turks but people who are connected to the political establishment of Israel or Turkey which I assume a prominent Israeli like Yoram Hozany is. That doesn't mean I couldn't come to trust the man, it means that I assume such a connected individual is first and foremost loyal to the interests of the Israeli state which works hand in hand with and benefits from this Western Globalist World Order. So I ask myself what does a man like Hozany want to promote National Conservatism for if true National Conservatism in the US/UK and Europe would likely run contrary to Israeli interests.
I think I understand where you're coming from. I went to an Evangelical Christian High School that was very Pro-Israel and believed the state of Israel was the Israel of the Bible. I obviously don't share that view but I understand it. I believe the Church is the continuation of the Israel of the Old Testament.
No I wasn't insinuating that you or anyone else don't trust Muslims, I'm saying that you probably would have less of a problem with me not trusting Turks than me not trusting Israelis. Tell me I'm wrong in that assumption.
Do I believe the Jews have a right to a homeland? The state of Israel is a fact whether I think it should be or not. It's a fact. It's also a nation state with nuclear weapons. Israel is not going anywhere regardless of what anyone thinks. It's a Geopolitical Reality. Yes I am sympathetic to the Palestinian people (not Hamas, the Palestinian people). What's happening in Gaza is ethnic cleansing and genocide. Palestinians are being starved to death. In the West Bank they are being squeezed out by armed settlers. The oldest Christian communities and shrines on earth are in the occupied West Bank. So no I am not a Zionist. I am in opposition to Zionism but I'm also a realist who understands that the state of Israel is going nowhere. Like I said it's a nuclear power. I don't know what I can say to you beyond that Linda.
I just don't want AIPAC or any other foreign lobby group controlling policy in Washington DC.
I have a major problem with that! Looks like every Turk and every Israeli and maybe every Mulim is not to be trusted. While we are at it, please define Zionism.
I'm rushing out to meet someone but any response will be responded to.
And when I say trust I'm not talking about the average Israeli or Turk, I'm talking prominent Israelis and Turks. I would be very careful getting entangled with them without a solid understanding that their first and foremost loyalty is to Israel and Turkey. Why do you think AIPAC greases the palms of Democrats and Republicans in Congress? And no I have no problem with Muslims (I'm actually married to one, she's a Turk/joke) or with Jews. I'm not talking about people of Jewish faith or Muslim faith. I'm talking about people who are actively involved in Israeli politics like Yoram Hazony. Like I said I have an open mind, but the prejudice is there and I don't hide my prejudices.
" They are encouraging Ukraine to fight a war that it can’t win." - this could have been said about Britain in 1939.
Otherwise, I am - somewhat - heartened by the legal victory and that the meeting was 'allowed' to go on. Only somewhat of course because what the city and mayor have been doing is ridiculous. And the liberal media, at home and abroad, is a farce.
Except Britain was eventually able to count on the US as its backer. Ukraine has had the US and NATO as its supplier of weapons, ammo, and funds since the thing started. This was has proved that raw manufacturing power still matters in war. Russia has it; we don't. Plus, Ukraine is running out of soldiers.
It could also be said about the confederacy in 1843. Just because a country is the underdog defending their homeland doesn't mean that country isn't the worse party in the conflict.
Even though I questioned Hazony's sincerity being that he self identifies as a Jewish Nationalist (that is to say, a Zionist) from a nation that has benefited greatly to it's relationship with, let's just call it "The Empire" (that is the the Global Machine of theTransatlanticist Elites who created Israel in the first place), I maintain an open mind. I have much respect for Viktor Orban, he's basically the best in the West right now. I'm glad it looks like Slovakia is taking Orban's independent stance now too albeit from the populist left (unfortunately the Globalists are back in power in Poland and are looking to punish the Catholic Nationalist/Populists who dared to challenge their stranglehold. The Law& Justice Party can blame themselves for that for embroiling Poland in the Ukraine War).
I'll tell you how to beat The Empire. You become completely self sufficient, self sustaining and thus independent of The Empire. Whatever you rely on the Empire for (be it electricity, petrol, money, water, food, etc.) then they have power and control over you. To beat the Empire you have to think and act like a rebel in occupied territory. Yes creating parallel institutions (even underground if need be) is a necessity. Access to food and water is a necessity. You can't beat the Empire at it's own game. That's why I've come to the conclusion that we can go through the machinations of elections and support "the best candidate" even though year after year it becomes more evident that the Regime wins no matter who you vote for. I'm starting to suspect they (The Regime of The Empire) might have even gotten to Trump. The Regime itself isn't monolithic. As I said yesterday they are neither left nor right. They will and have used anybody that they can coerce, blackmail or bribe to do their bidding. That's why I'm starting to believe anything short of revolution at this point is absolutely futile because any movement you start The Regime will infiltrate, corrupt and co-opt.
I don't object to Zionism as an idea (a homeland for the Jewish people)--it's when they consider it a "right" to take over land where other people already live that becomes a problem. Any nation that thinks conquest and ethnic cleansing gives them a "right to exist" is completely immoral.
And the irony is that the Arab-speaking Palestinians are genetically the same Canaanite people that have lived there for thousands of years...and so are the Jewish people (though mixed with other lines, such as European.)
And this is what's so frustrating about many "National Conservatives" (and other "Conservatives"): the nearly reflexive Zionism that they hold, recognizing the "right" of a group of people to a land they haven't lived in (in large numbers any way) for 2,000 years.
Here's the thing: in Rwanda, where 1 million people died in the Genocide 30 years ago, the Hutus and Tutsis were able to overcome this hatred and build a reasonably peaceful nation.
Is it not reasonable to expect the Israelis and the Arab-speaking Palestinians to do the same thing?
As far as "that ship has sailed", I don't buy it. WW II ended less than 80 years ago. The "ship" of an independent Jewish state in Palestine "sailed" over 2,000 years ago, at it was able to get re-started, despite requiring ethnic cleansing and the Founding of an explicitly religio-ethnic supremacist state.
It's not impossible. It would still be possible to carve Israel out of Germany, if it was possible to carve Israel out of Palestine 80 years ago. Or, it would be possible for a One-state solution, if it is possible for Hutus and Tusis to live together. Or, it would be possible to recognize the 1967 borders of two states and withdrawal all Israeli forces and settlers from occupied territories.
But Israel doesn't want any of that. They want all of Palestine as Israel, as the Likud has consistently demanded for 50 years. But they also will refuse to give full political rights to the non-Jewish people in the West Bank and Gaza, because that would mean that such a nation would mean at least half of the population would not be Jewish in their ethno-religious Jewish state.
Even if we refuse to help the Palestinian people, we sure as hell don't have to keep supporting the state of Israel.
I'm pretty sure it's not just Israel over there who doesn't want any of that. And again, I think that you and I might have different ideas about the scope of the *politically* possible in this scenario. I mean, sure, literally anything is *theoretically* possible, and you can dream of whatever you want. And through some wild and unpredictable twists of fate, you might even turn out to be right one day. But I'm not investing in it.
Sure—I'm in favor of doing that, and I think it's politically possible, as part of a broader policy push to withdraw from our various military investments and misadventures abroad. That's politically possible insofar as the ascendancy of national conservativsm and the downfall of the globalist elites is possible (and of course, that's exactly the main axis of struggle at this time around the world).
Israel will never be carved out of any place else. History prevents that. Then there's the demographic issue; in another 50 years the Orthodox and Ultra Orthodox Jews combined will outnumber everybody else. I don't know what Palestinian birth rates are like, but I suspect they're nowhere they need to be in order to contend with the Jews who want them out.
I don't think "history" prevents anything. The future is in God's hands. National borders and the movement of peoples are not in some kind of idealized "end state" where the fact of human migration that has existed ever since human beings have existed has come to an end.
As far as demographics, as of right now, non-Jews outnumber Jews in historic Palestine (Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank). If the right of return also existed (allowing Palestinian refugees to return home), they'd be in an even greater majority.
If the US stopped its military support for the Israeli regime, joined the international community on recognizing the Israeli occupation, and the BDS movement was allowed to naturally grow (and not prevented by unconstitutional state laws) the Israeli regime would come under severe pressure.
If the Ultra-Orthodox continue to grow and somehow hold onto their military exemptions (despite the Supreme Court's rulings), Israel will continue to have a strain on the military capabilities of the regime.
In addition, the absolutely baysh!t insane ramblings of the Ultra-Orthodox will make it increasingly obvious that Israel is in no way a "western-style democracy" and defending them diplomatically will be an increasingly fool's errand.
Israeli and other media outlets have revealed the beginnings of young Ultra Orthodox men volunteering for the military. Right now they tend to face disapproval from their community for doing so, but if their percentage of the population gets big enough I predict more and more will do so, if only out of self preservation. Though I should point out that poverty is also making that an attractive option.
The problem with the ultra Orthodox becoming dominant is that they do not serve in the military and are often supported with public welfare. That is just not viable on a larger scale.
Exactly, which is why I think we'll see some changes in how the Haredim relate to the nation they like to deny the legitimacy of, even as they milk its welfare department. Being anti-Zionists will not save them from those who want all Jews there dead or driven out. The current crop of leaders have some hard decisions to make if they don't have a death wish.
I agree on your first paragraph and you can thank the British for that.
Palestinians are definitely a Semitic people.
On the third paragraph. We have decades of conditioning Talib. The Western masses have been conditioned to reflexively defend the state of Israel no matter what the government in Tel Aviv does. Even mentioning something like the USS Liberty incident where the IDF blatantly attacked and nearly sunk a US Navy vessel killing dozens of sailors and wounding dozens more and you'll quickly be smeared as an Anti-Semite as well.
It's good to hear that the conference went on as scheduled but the fact that Belgian's Supreme Court had to overturn the original decision to shut it down does not really instill much confidence.
Why? The municipalities broke the law in trying to shut the conference down (the PM's letter was explicit about it). The court did what it was supposed to do.
Just the fact that the mayor and district mayors tried to shut down the conference in the first place. It's doubtful that they'll apologize or admit overstepping authority; instead they'll double-down about the need to contain militant Catholics and try again when the next opportunity arises.
Makes me wonder if the powers that be in Belgium and EU were smart enough to realise this was enough of an “own goal” as Farage put it, that they needed to expedite the court case to limit the political damage.
That's an excellent point, but the coverage at least in the anglophone press would lead to another conclusion. I don't know what the French-language press is saying.
By the way, do you know the cognate for Portuguese of "anglophone" and "francophone"? Lusophone. I love that.
Maybe the imagery was enough. The photos of a bunch of uniformed policeman at the entrance to keep participants out and no Antifa in sight looked pretty bad no matter what language it is in. It may not matter what is said in the anglophone press because none of their associated nations' citizens can vote in the upcoming EU elections anyway, so what is said in the continental press is what is important. How do you say "conservatives pounce" in French or German?
Hey! Today, you rock!
Long made it last!
The Guardian is far left, expect nothing but trouble from them. They’ve always been like that.
“the strategy of deliberately constructing a parallel state from the ground up”
This is exactly like the approach in proper anarchism, except they would say building the new “society” within the shell of the old, given that the state per se is understood as an apparatus of violence. Of course, there’s also a strong resonance here with Havel’s ideas about resistance.
Building the new society within the shell of the old is classical Marxist language -- and its true, Marxists shared a lot of common origins with anarchists, working the same milieus, attending many of the same congresses and conferences. Leninists, not so much -- I've heard something more like building the new society on the ashes of the old. That tends to be unreliable as to the net results achieved, but then, so is anarchism.
Amen, Rod, blessings to my heart to hear this. Still praying for your friend, in Jesus's name.
Thanks man, but he died yesterday. Hard stuff. Please pray for his wife Jo.
https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/obituary/2024/04/vale-david-martin-jones/
That is very sad to learn...
Sorry to hear this. He sounds like quite a fellow. Memory eternal!
I’m sorry, Rod. May his memory be eternal. God give you (and his family) peace as you remember him.
Many years ago, God set things in a way that I was able to be with a dear friend of mine as his grandmother (who, for sad reasons, was more like his mother) was dying. She lay in hospital for a bit more than two weeks in a coma, and it was questionable whether she was "there" most of that time. My friend and I sat with her the last night she spent on this earth, and I had a very strong sense that she was there then, and she was hanging on just long enough for my friend to come to grips with the fact that it was time for her to go. We just don't know what's going on when people are in states like that, but hopefully this time your friend had was to his benefit and helped bring him closer to God.
I will do so, the Lord's comfort and peace for her and the family.
So sorry to hear this. Remember Manfred.
"... mentre che la speranza ha fior del verde."
Memory eternal!
Glad to hear the conference was able to be held. I’m sitting here watching Jeopardy & there’s a guy on named Jeff who named his son Ignatius because his favorite book is A Confederacy of Dunces! Also said he & his wife like Iggy Pop & they’re Catholic & like St Ignatius Loyola. I’m rooting for him!
Did he win?
No unfortunately he came in 2nd.
BUT HE IS NUMBER ONE IN MY HEART!
I read this and it made my head hurt...
>>>Conservatism has become mostly about whiners and grifters
I think that this describes what is the Elites’ approved, ostensible leftism and liberalism are. Actually, I should say that about most of the political class and the system of NGOs supporting it regardless of whatever the stated ideologies are.
Much as corporations make their money, not by providing a better or less expensive product or service, but by stock buybacks and selling off bits the business until it’s all gone down while lying cheating all the while. All for the immediate cash that they can steal. Investment, research, training employees, paying for better employees or better products are all ignored.
The various organizations in politics, education, the old line charities like the Red Cross and perhaps even in religion are all the same: the management want to make money and to perdition with anything or anyone else and regardless of the stated purpose of the organization. When everything from the mayor’s office to the local sewage plant to my college diploma to my soul are all up for sale to the highest (corporate) bidder, how can anything work? I should just have the winning bidders tattoo their advertising on my body. Maybe I can get something to help pay for my ever increasing food, rent, and power.
No, we don’t have liberal or conservative parties, we have money making grifts; it’s turtles all the way down.
Nice Sturgill Simpson reference.
‘Canceled’ for Protesting Cancel Culture, Europe’s Right-Wingers Rejoice
This might be a world record for most concentrated lies in a single headline, coming from our Paper of Record.
"Cancelled"? Showing up to a conference to find it ringed by police and the govt attempting to shut it down (in real time) is to "cancelled" what an amputation is to wart removal. This was by no means any type of "cancelling" but a direct governmental assault on the rights of free speech, thought and assembly (things liberals used to defend);
"for Protesting Cancel Culture"? Is this what Conservatism (in all its flavors) looks like in the minds of our Brahmin Left? Just another round of Culture War dodgeball? So I guess "cancel culture" is real now, after a decade of liberals gaslighting about it and saying it was just a fever dream of Fox News?
"Europe’s Right-Wingers"? Does everyone opposed to Social Justice Inc. have to be right-wing? No more libertarians, classic liberals, skeptics etc? Everyone has to wear the same label so the readership will be made aware of the moral pollution here and know to hold their noses and ears? This is how free thought and fair-play discourse die.
"Rejoice"? To be locked inside or outside a venue you traveled to and to protest is to "Rejoice"? So the liberals get caught with their hands in Orwell's cookie jar and the lesson here is how happy it makes conservatives? This alone shows you how embarrassingly infantile our discourse has become—if those evil NatCons are rejoicing, it only proves how right we were all along!
The liberal class imagines themselves locked in a Holy War against a whole army of "far right" extremists, nationalists, Deplorables etc, but the truth is no one has inflicted any wounds as devastating as the ones they've inflicted upon themselves. Almost 10 years after the Orange One came down his golden escalator and the tantrum is not close to ending. In their desperate quest to destroy all their enemies the one thing that will be definitely destroyed is the MSM's claims of credibility, veracity, authority. May the roof come down on their heads as soon as possible...
I wish the American Solidarity Party would strategize along the lines of N.S. Lyons' advice. If they could do it without losing their ethos, that would be SO good.
Dana
Long live the pelicans.
Even though I questioned Hazony's sincerity being that he self identifies as a Jewish Nationalist (that is to say, a Zionist) from a nation that has benefited greatly to it's relationship with, let's just call it "The Empire" (that is the the Global Machine of theTransatlanticist Elites who created Israel in the first place), I maintain an open mind. I have much respect for Viktor Orban, he's basically the best in the West right now. I'm glad it looks like Slovakia is taking Orban's independent stance now too albeit from the populist left (unfortunately the Globalists are back in power in Poland and are looking to punish the Catholic Nationalist/Populists who dared to challenge their stranglehold. The Law& Justice Party can blame themselves for that for embroiling Poland in the Ukraine War).
I'll tell you how to beat The Empire. You become completely self sufficient, self sustaining and thus independent of The Empire. Whatever you rely on the Empire for (be it electricity, petrol, money, water, food, etc.) then they have power and control over you. To beat the Empire you have to think and act like a rebel in occupied territory. Yes creating parallel institutions (even underground if need be) is a necessity. Access to food and water is a necessity. You can't beat the Empire at it's own game. That's why I've come to the conclusion that we can go through the machinations of elections and support "the best candidate" even though year after year it becomes more evident that the Regime wins no matter who you vote for. I'm starting to suspect they (The Regime of The Empire) might have even gotten to Trump. The Regime itself isn't monolithic. As I said yesterday they are neither left nor right. They will and have used anybody that they can coerce, blackmail or bribe to do their bidding. That's why I'm starting to believe anything short of revolution at this point is absolutely futile because any movement you start The Regime will infiltrate, corrupt and co-opt.
Friend, you really ought to give it a rest.
Theodore Iacobuzio: Agreed, but he won't be able to give it a rest. While 'anti-Semite' is often used to mean 'someone who hates Jews', it's much better understood as a person who may have no hostility to Jews as individuals, but nevertheless sees the Sinister Hand of International Jewry at the root of everything they hate and fear. It's noticeable that the classic anti-Semite can't refrain from introducing their phobia (it is a phobia, in the sense of 'an irrational fear') into every discussion, however far removed from the original topic it may be. There are a couple of other regular contributors to this list who fall under the same heading.
"a person who may have no hostility to Jews as individuals, but nevertheless sees the Sinister Hand of International Jewry at the root of everything they hate and fear"
Like Dostoevsky, unfortunately: as far as I know, he had no personal hostility to individual Jews, but to him "Jewish" was synonymous with modern European secularism, the antithesis of the Russian tradition. He was right to criticize the tendency he did, but totally bizarre in identifying it as Jewish.
It wasn't totally bizarre for his day and age though, regrettable as it was.
True—I meant intellectually bizarre, even if it was par for the historical course.
Rasputin was ahead of his time and actually advocated for the rights of Jews within Russia. Indeed, that might have contributed to people thinking he was a traitor and wanting to kill him.
Dosty was very strongly anti-Roman Catholic as well, but his biographer puts a lot of that down to the fact that the only Catholics he had any real experience with were the French, and he painted all RC's in that light. I know nothing about 19th C. French Catholicism so I can't speak to those particulars.
I've seen a claim that Rasputin openly seeking to persuade the Tsar to eliminate the last of Russia's anti Jewish laws was Prince Yusopov's motive in the assassination.
Seriously? I read, I think, seven of his books and did not see this at all. I did not know, and I am kind of shocked, because I have such a high opinion of Doestoevsky. I trust you that this true but I wonder where you saw this?
It doesn't show up in his novels, but he is very clear about his views in his journals, published as *A Writer's Diary*. Again, it had to do with his association of the Jews with secularism (opposed to what he might call "the intrinsic religiosity of the Russian soul"), so he considered it as a philosophical point rather than a matter of racial animus per se. But of course that's still pretty bad.
Thanks, Setuh. Is the same true of Tolstly? And....I take it that he was only against non-religious Jews and he knew that not all Jews were non-religious? I'm not sure why he was not also against non-religious Russians.
Well, he sort of was but not in the way you appear to say he was against secular Jews.
Yeah, anyone who gives an iota of credence to the Protocols has a problem.
So just merely reading it means you're an, "Anti-Semite"? Interesting.
It depends why one reads it. Have you read it?
Yes I have and I'm skeptical as to it's authenticity, however it fascinating to read. I've always said if it was a forgery it was the most prophetic forgery ever written and if you substituted Jew for Globalist nobody here on these comment blogs would disagree that everything written in the Protocols on how to destroy Christendom and the Western nations and peoples came to pass.
It's well-established that it's a forgery, so why read it, except maybe for informational purposes? I certainly wouldn't give it an ounce of credence.
You should read it first before you dismiss it completely.
Wait - I don't read all those long posts. Credence for the Protocols of the Elders of Zion? That is seriously, seriously wrong.
I think you should read it for yourself and come to your own conclusions. I read it and I'm not sure if it was a forgery or not, but a lot of the plans made in it were carried out whether that was done as a conspiracy of a group of Elitist Jews or not. You should read it. You can read Mein Kampf and not be a Nazi. You can read the communist manifesto and not be a communist.
Well, I've been accused of such in these boxes, and I trust you're not talking about me: skepticism regarding what the Israelis get up to doesn't in my view constitute anything but an opinion, though certain writers on X and elsewhere would disagree.
If one believed that our own government is corrupt in the usual manner of most governments but that the Israeli government can uniquely do no wrong, then well, I'd consider that to be an irrational view. A Jewish state is still a state.
That's a great insight about the anti - Semite's paranoid inability to refrain from foisting his obsession onto everything. If rain forces postponement of the ballgame, it's the fault of some Jew somewhere.
Inasmuch as there never in history was a Kingdom of Palestine, "Palestinians" claim to a state fall flat. But shame on Jews for thinking they have a claim to that land! I wonder where they could have gotten that notion?
Everytime I see a comment which begins as J Alexander's does, my only question is whether I want to bother reading it. He claims to be a Christian, and there is no ingratitude to compare with that of a Christian who is an anti - Semite.
Your ballgame thing: John Hay said that if Vesuvius started to glow his friend Henry Adams would say the Jews were stoking it. So yes.
Are you ok with Israel trying to drag us to war with Iran and Syria and their proxies?
No. I said so, say so, explicitly. I think the "no daylight" business is nonsense on stilts. But bringing up Hazony's "Zionism" in the context of the NCC makes me want to say what I said: give it a rest.
Are you Ok with making false, made-up accusations about what Israel is doing?
Theodore, I see you sent me a message. But Substack won't let me sign in to see it. I am not surprised by this, because I rarely have any such thing come off easily for me. Almost always, I'm impeded by something.
They don't recognize me. They won't allow my username. They won't let me sign in with Google. Something. Almost every time.
Please send me an email at bobbylime1959@duck.com
So being cynical towards the secular state of Israel and the Israeli lobby means I'm an "Anti-Semite". Let just say to be fair I don't want any foreign nation deciding the policies of my government, that doesn't make me a Jew hater that makes me a Nationalist and a Patriot. I was explaining this to JPN yesterday. I'm of Mexican heritage and I don't like to see Mexican flags in my country unless their flown side by side the Old Glory. Same with the Palestinian flag. I like Palestinians. I am sympathetic to the suffering of the Palestinian people but if you're going to fly a Palestinian flag I'm protest to US foreign policy while living in America there needs to be an American flag with it. And no we don't need what the GOP just rubber stamped which is that FISA Bill authorizing more warrantless surveillance and no we don't need Congress making pointless declarations to prove their Israeli bootlicking credentials by condemning the slogan, "River to the Sea" as Anti-Semitic. That's not the role of Congress to lock Israeli boots, especially when Netanyahu himself says Israel needs to control the territory from "The River to the Sea", meaning he wants to use the Israeli military to carve out a Greater Israel out of Lebanon and Syria and.maybe even Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. AIPAC owns our Government in Washington lock stock and barrel and you have no problem with that Bobby?
In fairness to you, I recognize that you belong to a Church which, as far as I understand Eastern Orthodox eschatology, doesn't believe there is any role for a national Israel in the coming Kingdom of Christ. I believe in premillenial eschatology, which holds that Israel does indeed have a glorious future as a nation, a nation of Jews who have become believers in Jesus Christ. I think there is a decisive weight of evidence in Romans 9 - 11 that this is true.
No, J. Alexander, I do not believe you are a Nazi, and yes, I'm well aware of Israel's strongly secular current culture, and no, I do not think the government of Israel ought to be immune to reproach.
As for AIPAC, better them than CAIR. I wish you would start to consider that Israel is a vital national interest of ours. It's an ally. Israel has nukes and that doesn't scare me. The prospect of Iran's getting nukes should scare the crap out of everyone. I think that the United States should do everything it can to aid and abet the Israelis in destroying Iran's nuclear research and development.
It should be eloquent as a demonstration of what the Arab states think of the Iranians that the Saudis and the Jordanians were part of the Israeli fight against the Iranian missiles last Saturday.
There are no "Palestinian people" because there never was a Kingdom of Palestine. As I understand matters, those people are essentially Egyptian. Ask yourself why Egypt doesn't want them.
As for Gaza, what should the Israelis do, do you think? I'd like to hear your ideas. Have you seen prewar photos of the Gazan beaches? There is in my view great merit to the idea that twenty years ago, the Gazans were given territory they could have made an Arab Singapore of. All they could think to do was to plan to wipe out Jews.
I don't like CAIR either, but we should follow the foreign policy advice of our founding fathers. Commerce with all nations, alliance with none.
"In Christ there is neither Jew not Greek..."
And I thought it was wonderful of you to say something, Sue. I'd been trying to just ignore it - don't respond, don't put a like, just skip whatever it says as soon as it is skimmed and the Z-word appears. - but yes, it's out of hand ,as you said, pretty much every post.
Linda, I don't use Zionist as a slur. I use it as a title. It's a title that Zionists use themselves. Hazony uses it himself. It is a political ideology. Theodore Herzl is the godfather of Zionism.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodor_Herzl
Zionism is the belief that the Jews should have a homeland. If you are anti-Zionist then you believe the nation of Israel should be ended. Others explained things very well above, so this will not be a long post. I was raised as a Protestant Zionist from childhood. I am still a Zionist. And I hope you will clarify that this revolution you think should happen will not include violence on your part.
(btw, I was meeting with a Mexican citizen who is a new friend of mine this evening and I spent the greater part of my teaching career teaching student in Arizona who were from, mainly, Mexico, i.e., they or their parents were born there.)
You said <<Yes because I don't trust Israelis. I don't trust Turks either but I'm sure none of you have a problem with that because Turks are Muslims>>. This means you claim none of us trust Muslims, which is completely false.
I was speaking for myself personally when I said I don't trust Israelis or Turks and I was not talking about regular Israelis or Turks but people who are connected to the political establishment of Israel or Turkey which I assume a prominent Israeli like Yoram Hozany is. That doesn't mean I couldn't come to trust the man, it means that I assume such a connected individual is first and foremost loyal to the interests of the Israeli state which works hand in hand with and benefits from this Western Globalist World Order. So I ask myself what does a man like Hozany want to promote National Conservatism for if true National Conservatism in the US/UK and Europe would likely run contrary to Israeli interests.
I think I understand where you're coming from. I went to an Evangelical Christian High School that was very Pro-Israel and believed the state of Israel was the Israel of the Bible. I obviously don't share that view but I understand it. I believe the Church is the continuation of the Israel of the Old Testament.
No I wasn't insinuating that you or anyone else don't trust Muslims, I'm saying that you probably would have less of a problem with me not trusting Turks than me not trusting Israelis. Tell me I'm wrong in that assumption.
Do I believe the Jews have a right to a homeland? The state of Israel is a fact whether I think it should be or not. It's a fact. It's also a nation state with nuclear weapons. Israel is not going anywhere regardless of what anyone thinks. It's a Geopolitical Reality. Yes I am sympathetic to the Palestinian people (not Hamas, the Palestinian people). What's happening in Gaza is ethnic cleansing and genocide. Palestinians are being starved to death. In the West Bank they are being squeezed out by armed settlers. The oldest Christian communities and shrines on earth are in the occupied West Bank. So no I am not a Zionist. I am in opposition to Zionism but I'm also a realist who understands that the state of Israel is going nowhere. Like I said it's a nuclear power. I don't know what I can say to you beyond that Linda.
I just don't want AIPAC or any other foreign lobby group controlling policy in Washington DC.
Give what a rest, please specify if you have criticism of me or my stance on the issue?
Vide supra. Hazony's opinions on the mideast pop up immediately you started typing.
Yes because I don't trust Israelis. I don't trust Turks either but I'm sure none of you have a problem with that because Turks are Muslims.
I have a major problem with that! Looks like every Turk and every Israeli and maybe every Mulim is not to be trusted. While we are at it, please define Zionism.
I'm rushing out to meet someone but any response will be responded to.
Zionism is a secular Jewish Nationalist political ideology.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism
And when I say trust I'm not talking about the average Israeli or Turk, I'm talking prominent Israelis and Turks. I would be very careful getting entangled with them without a solid understanding that their first and foremost loyalty is to Israel and Turkey. Why do you think AIPAC greases the palms of Democrats and Republicans in Congress? And no I have no problem with Muslims (I'm actually married to one, she's a Turk/joke) or with Jews. I'm not talking about people of Jewish faith or Muslim faith. I'm talking about people who are actively involved in Israeli politics like Yoram Hazony. Like I said I have an open mind, but the prejudice is there and I don't hide my prejudices.
Don't suppose there's a transcript of Lyons' speech anywhere? I've been interested in prefigurative politics for some time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prefigurative_politics
I'm sure the video will be published soon by NatCon.
" They are encouraging Ukraine to fight a war that it can’t win." - this could have been said about Britain in 1939.
Otherwise, I am - somewhat - heartened by the legal victory and that the meeting was 'allowed' to go on. Only somewhat of course because what the city and mayor have been doing is ridiculous. And the liberal media, at home and abroad, is a farce.
Except Britain was eventually able to count on the US as its backer. Ukraine has had the US and NATO as its supplier of weapons, ammo, and funds since the thing started. This was has proved that raw manufacturing power still matters in war. Russia has it; we don't. Plus, Ukraine is running out of soldiers.
I can see the Ukrainian army breaking under the strain of overwhelming numbers like Lee's army in Spring, 1865.
It could also be said about the confederacy in 1843. Just because a country is the underdog defending their homeland doesn't mean that country isn't the worse party in the conflict.
Even though I questioned Hazony's sincerity being that he self identifies as a Jewish Nationalist (that is to say, a Zionist) from a nation that has benefited greatly to it's relationship with, let's just call it "The Empire" (that is the the Global Machine of theTransatlanticist Elites who created Israel in the first place), I maintain an open mind. I have much respect for Viktor Orban, he's basically the best in the West right now. I'm glad it looks like Slovakia is taking Orban's independent stance now too albeit from the populist left (unfortunately the Globalists are back in power in Poland and are looking to punish the Catholic Nationalist/Populists who dared to challenge their stranglehold. The Law& Justice Party can blame themselves for that for embroiling Poland in the Ukraine War).
I'll tell you how to beat The Empire. You become completely self sufficient, self sustaining and thus independent of The Empire. Whatever you rely on the Empire for (be it electricity, petrol, money, water, food, etc.) then they have power and control over you. To beat the Empire you have to think and act like a rebel in occupied territory. Yes creating parallel institutions (even underground if need be) is a necessity. Access to food and water is a necessity. You can't beat the Empire at it's own game. That's why I've come to the conclusion that we can go through the machinations of elections and support "the best candidate" even though year after year it becomes more evident that the Regime wins no matter who you vote for. I'm starting to suspect they (The Regime of The Empire) might have even gotten to Trump. The Regime itself isn't monolithic. As I said yesterday they are neither left nor right. They will and have used anybody that they can coerce, blackmail or bribe to do their bidding. That's why I'm starting to believe anything short of revolution at this point is absolutely futile because any movement you start The Regime will infiltrate, corrupt and co-opt.
I don't object to Zionism as an idea (a homeland for the Jewish people)--it's when they consider it a "right" to take over land where other people already live that becomes a problem. Any nation that thinks conquest and ethnic cleansing gives them a "right to exist" is completely immoral.
And the irony is that the Arab-speaking Palestinians are genetically the same Canaanite people that have lived there for thousands of years...and so are the Jewish people (though mixed with other lines, such as European.)
And this is what's so frustrating about many "National Conservatives" (and other "Conservatives"): the nearly reflexive Zionism that they hold, recognizing the "right" of a group of people to a land they haven't lived in (in large numbers any way) for 2,000 years.
We should have probably just carved out a part of eastern Germany for the Jews at the end of World War II, but that ship has long since sailed.
Here's the thing: in Rwanda, where 1 million people died in the Genocide 30 years ago, the Hutus and Tutsis were able to overcome this hatred and build a reasonably peaceful nation.
Is it not reasonable to expect the Israelis and the Arab-speaking Palestinians to do the same thing?
As far as "that ship has sailed", I don't buy it. WW II ended less than 80 years ago. The "ship" of an independent Jewish state in Palestine "sailed" over 2,000 years ago, at it was able to get re-started, despite requiring ethnic cleansing and the Founding of an explicitly religio-ethnic supremacist state.
It's not impossible. It would still be possible to carve Israel out of Germany, if it was possible to carve Israel out of Palestine 80 years ago. Or, it would be possible for a One-state solution, if it is possible for Hutus and Tusis to live together. Or, it would be possible to recognize the 1967 borders of two states and withdrawal all Israeli forces and settlers from occupied territories.
But Israel doesn't want any of that. They want all of Palestine as Israel, as the Likud has consistently demanded for 50 years. But they also will refuse to give full political rights to the non-Jewish people in the West Bank and Gaza, because that would mean that such a nation would mean at least half of the population would not be Jewish in their ethno-religious Jewish state.
Even if we refuse to help the Palestinian people, we sure as hell don't have to keep supporting the state of Israel.
I'm pretty sure it's not just Israel over there who doesn't want any of that. And again, I think that you and I might have different ideas about the scope of the *politically* possible in this scenario. I mean, sure, literally anything is *theoretically* possible, and you can dream of whatever you want. And through some wild and unpredictable twists of fate, you might even turn out to be right one day. But I'm not investing in it.
Would you think that it's politically possible to stop feeding the monster of the Israeli military? And if not, why not?
Sure—I'm in favor of doing that, and I think it's politically possible, as part of a broader policy push to withdraw from our various military investments and misadventures abroad. That's politically possible insofar as the ascendancy of national conservativsm and the downfall of the globalist elites is possible (and of course, that's exactly the main axis of struggle at this time around the world).
Israel will never be carved out of any place else. History prevents that. Then there's the demographic issue; in another 50 years the Orthodox and Ultra Orthodox Jews combined will outnumber everybody else. I don't know what Palestinian birth rates are like, but I suspect they're nowhere they need to be in order to contend with the Jews who want them out.
I don't think "history" prevents anything. The future is in God's hands. National borders and the movement of peoples are not in some kind of idealized "end state" where the fact of human migration that has existed ever since human beings have existed has come to an end.
As far as demographics, as of right now, non-Jews outnumber Jews in historic Palestine (Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank). If the right of return also existed (allowing Palestinian refugees to return home), they'd be in an even greater majority.
If the US stopped its military support for the Israeli regime, joined the international community on recognizing the Israeli occupation, and the BDS movement was allowed to naturally grow (and not prevented by unconstitutional state laws) the Israeli regime would come under severe pressure.
If the Ultra-Orthodox continue to grow and somehow hold onto their military exemptions (despite the Supreme Court's rulings), Israel will continue to have a strain on the military capabilities of the regime.
In addition, the absolutely baysh!t insane ramblings of the Ultra-Orthodox will make it increasingly obvious that Israel is in no way a "western-style democracy" and defending them diplomatically will be an increasingly fool's errand.
Israeli and other media outlets have revealed the beginnings of young Ultra Orthodox men volunteering for the military. Right now they tend to face disapproval from their community for doing so, but if their percentage of the population gets big enough I predict more and more will do so, if only out of self preservation. Though I should point out that poverty is also making that an attractive option.
The problem with the ultra Orthodox becoming dominant is that they do not serve in the military and are often supported with public welfare. That is just not viable on a larger scale.
Exactly, which is why I think we'll see some changes in how the Haredim relate to the nation they like to deny the legitimacy of, even as they milk its welfare department. Being anti-Zionists will not save them from those who want all Jews there dead or driven out. The current crop of leaders have some hard decisions to make if they don't have a death wish.
I agree on your first paragraph and you can thank the British for that.
Palestinians are definitely a Semitic people.
On the third paragraph. We have decades of conditioning Talib. The Western masses have been conditioned to reflexively defend the state of Israel no matter what the government in Tel Aviv does. Even mentioning something like the USS Liberty incident where the IDF blatantly attacked and nearly sunk a US Navy vessel killing dozens of sailors and wounding dozens more and you'll quickly be smeared as an Anti-Semite as well.
Rod, as a guy about your age who is losing his hair, I gotta say that I love your hair.
Grazie. But you know, when it reaches this stage, i don't know if it needs the attention of a barber, or an exorcist.
It's good to hear that the conference went on as scheduled but the fact that Belgian's Supreme Court had to overturn the original decision to shut it down does not really instill much confidence.
Why? The municipalities broke the law in trying to shut the conference down (the PM's letter was explicit about it). The court did what it was supposed to do.
Just the fact that the mayor and district mayors tried to shut down the conference in the first place. It's doubtful that they'll apologize or admit overstepping authority; instead they'll double-down about the need to contain militant Catholics and try again when the next opportunity arises.
Makes me wonder if the powers that be in Belgium and EU were smart enough to realise this was enough of an “own goal” as Farage put it, that they needed to expedite the court case to limit the political damage.
That's an excellent point, but the coverage at least in the anglophone press would lead to another conclusion. I don't know what the French-language press is saying.
By the way, do you know the cognate for Portuguese of "anglophone" and "francophone"? Lusophone. I love that.
Maybe the imagery was enough. The photos of a bunch of uniformed policeman at the entrance to keep participants out and no Antifa in sight looked pretty bad no matter what language it is in. It may not matter what is said in the anglophone press because none of their associated nations' citizens can vote in the upcoming EU elections anyway, so what is said in the continental press is what is important. How do you say "conservatives pounce" in French or German?