For many years Europeans were used to the US carrying most of the burden of defending Europe against the military threat of the Soviet Union and later against the threat of its successor the Russian Federation.
With the advent of “America first”, a policy that sometimes resembles good old isolationism, that era seems to come to an end.
Given Europe’s widespread anti-Americanism one would think that Europe would welcome such an opportunity to become independent from the “hegemon” America with open arms. One would think that Europe would cheer at the prospect of having all US troops leaving Europe.
Instead Europe reacts with fear, insecurity and crazy conspiracy theories.

US-President Donald Trump is right when he calls for Europe to pay its fair share of NATO.
There was a time when it was necessary for the US to carry the lion’s share of Europe’s military defense.
After the second world war Europe was economically bankrupt, flattened and laying in ruins.
Millions had died in wars, in famines and in concentration camps.
There was nothing that could prevent Stalin’s Red Army from steamrolling over Europe except a massive American military presence in Europe.
Europe’s economies and Europe’s militaries had to be built up with huge economic support from the US (the Marshall plan) in order for them to make any meaningful contribution to Europe’s defense.
Today it’s a very different story. Europe’s combined GDP is greater than that of the US and Russia is viewed by the US as a greater threat to Europe than to the US.

Why is Europe refusing to pay its fair share of NATO?
The answer is that, obviously, Europeans do not view Russia as a threat.
This, of course, is not true for the countries that were involontary members of the former Soviet bloc but for the rest of Europe it is.

Why then have Europeans uneasy feelings at the thought of the US leaving them alone and forcing them to defend themselves?
The answer has to do with Europe’s history.

The EU is selling the myth that it is the institution of the EU that is guaranteeing peace in Europe by having the European countries trading and working with each other instead of shooting at each other. This myth has become the EU’s reason of existence and everytime the unelected EU bureaucrats see their power threatened by attempts to take power away from them and giving it to the nation states and their peoples the horror scenario of a return to nationalism and war is invoked.
The truth, however, is that it was never the EU that kept the peace in Europe.

It was the massive presence of US military on European soil and the threat of Soviet aggression as well as the integration in the NATO alliance that forced self-restraint and discipline upon the Europeans.
It is no coincidence that after an unprecedented period of peace the wars in Yugoslavia erupted just when the Soviet Union had collapsed.
It became abundandly clear that Europe was not able to handle the situation and in the end the US had to come to the rescue.

For all its glorious culture and splendid civilization, Europe is a continent that through its history of thousands of years was almost constantly plagued by wars, massacres and pogroms. The current era of peace is unprecedented in Europe’s history.

This brings me to Europe’s dirty little secret.
Many Europeans view Americans as unsophisticated, uncultivated cowboys but deep down Europeans know that under the thin crust of European civilization war, barbarism and brutality is never far away. We Europeans know what we are capable of doing. The carnage of two world wars is ample proof of it.
The thing that Europeans fear most are other Europeans.

There is perhaps a better, brighter future but the EU is not the solution.
Other than its name “European Union” implies the EU causes increasingly division and antagonism among the European countries. Brexit and the dispute between the EU and the Vizegrad states with regards to the “refugee crisis” are only the most recent examples.


Getting In The Mood …

December 15, 2017

Come, oh come, Messiah. This crazy world needs you badly.

Come, oh come, Prince of Peace.

The George Harrison Tactic

December 14, 2017

When engaging with leftists and racists, we should use the George Harrison tactic more often.
Since most leftists are not independent thinkers, this tactic should work great.
What is the George Harrison tactic? Well, the tactic is best explained by Harrison himself.

From the article Rock and the Counterculture of the 1960s:

In Harrison’s ‘My Sweet Lord,’ he praises the Hindu god Krishna, and almost imperceptibly switches from the word ‘hallelujah’ to the phrase ‘Hare Krishna.’

Harrison said ‘I wanted to show that Hallelujah and Hare Krishna are quite the same thing. I did the voices singing ‘Hallelujah’ and then the change to ‘Hare Krishna’ so that people would be chanting the maha-mantra before they knew what was going on!…My idea in ‘My Sweet Lord,’ because it sounded like a ‘pop song,’ was to sneak up on them a bit. The point was to have the people not offended by ‘Hallelujah,’ and by the time it gets to ‘Hare Krishna,’ they’re already hooded, and their foot’s tapping, and they’re already singing along ‘Hallelujah,’ to kind of lull them into a sense of false security. And then suddenly it turns into ‘Hare Krishna,’ and they will all be singing that before they know what’s happened, and they will think, ‘Hey, I thought I wasn’t supposed to like Hare Krishna!…It was just a little trick really.’ (Harrison, Krishna web site, http://introduction.Krishna.org/Articles/2000/08/00066.html)

In the following example I show how we can apply the George Harrison tactic in the political discussion. I have tried to use George Harrison’s tactic more effectively then George Harrison himself.

Can you spot the Hare Krishna?
Have fun!

The Racist’s Secret Superweapon

My friends. today I want to talk about a weapon that is not much talked about. It is a weapon that is used to great effect by the same system that uses structural racism in order to keep minorities down. It is a weapon used by the people who are oppressing their fellow human beings based on gender, race and religion in order to maximize their own, mostly white, power.
Before white Europeans set foot in America, Africa, Asia, Australia and India they had already invented a system of oppression. This system was designed and used by rich, white, exclusively male, feudalistic rulers in order to enrich themselves and to live a life of luxury and splendor with insatiable greed for power while the masses were languishing in unspeakable squalor, pain, illness, hunger and darkness.
The perverse, evil genius of the system was that not only did it enable the white oppressors’ resource draining lifestyle but it kept the masses permanently down.
You will understand the evil genius of the system when you see how it has developed over time.
It all began with superstition. It began with “sacred” Christian scripture. The Christian bible calls the believer (in this cosmic nonsense) to give a tenth of his income (the Tithe) volontarily to the church.
A big part of the tithe was supposed to go to the poor but as you can guess, that never worked really well. Thanks to seven centuries of religious brainwashing the masses offered less resisitance than they would have without the brainwashing when the tithe became mandatory in the 8th century. At that point in time only 25% of the tithe was supposed to go to the poor.
By the 12th century the tithe had become a tax that was collected by the feudal rulers. The part that was going to the poor was whatever the feudal ruler and the church wanted to give (which was practically nothing).
Resistance was futile now. The tithe was now a tax that was collected by brutal men at the point of the sword.
The feudal ruler and the church were the state. Under the pretense that the state collected the money for the benefit of the poor the state collected a tax from the poor.
You may think that a 10% tax is not much but these were very different times. First, the nominal tax rate of 10% could (depending on definitions and calculations) reach up to a 30% actual tax rate.
Second, agriculture was very primitive and therefore production was low. This meant that the farmers were always on the very edge of survival and always just one step away from starvation.
It’s obvious that the white feudal rulers used taxation not only as a means to enrich themselves but they used it as a weapon to keep the poor permanently poor.
We know that money is power. Being barely able to keep themselves alive, those poor farmers were not able to become financially indenpendent or to organize any form of resistence.
They could not hire mercenaries like the farmers in the movie “The Magnificent Seven”.
Those who could not sustain themselves and their families any longer could give themselves into eternal bondage by becoming serfs. They were given a patch of land which they were allowed to work and to keep what was left after taxes payable to their master.
Serfs owned nothing. They were the property of their lord. When the land on which they lived was sold they became the property of the new owner. They were inherited together with the land. Serfs could not leave the land without their master’s permission and their children would die as serfs just like their parents.
Before white Europeans had colonized the world they have had perfected a system of serfdom and slavery on their fellow white Europeans.
In medieval Europe most white Europeans lived themselves in serfdom and slavery.
The weapon the white feudalists used was taxation. By using that deadly superweapon they kept  themselves rich and they kept the poor in a permanant state of helplessness. No competition for the feudalist!
All this was only possible because the feudalists were the state. Only the state can use the weapon of taxation to keep itself in power. Only the state has the power to keep the poor permanently poor.
Since we know that white racists are running the state we should give this state as little power as possible. This means that this state should get as little taxes as possible. Rember? Money is power.
The less taxes the state collects, the less power it has. The less power this racist state has, the more power WE have. Cut taxes now! Starve the racist monster!

Antifa claims that it fights Fascism. Is this really true?
Let’s forget for a moment that Antifa uses the same methods that Fascists and Nazis use.
Let’s forget for a moment that Antifa displays the same intolerance and hate that the Fascists and Nazis do.
If Antifa was truly about fighting Fascism it would welcome with open arms people from across the whole political spectrum in its ranks.
It would welcome Democrats, Republicans, liberals and conservatives. Among the people mentioned there are plenty who are vehemently opposed to fascism.
Instead, Antifa attacks conservatives and everyone else who does not support their radical leftist goals.
The people who really DID FIGHT Fascism during WW2 would be smeared today as Fascists and racists.
The boys and men who fought and died on the beaches of Normandy, in the hills of Italy and in the forests of France, under the very flag that Antifa defecates upon.
The boys and men who freed human beings in Germany’s concentration camps, they would today be considered Fascists by Antifa.
And it wouldn’t matter whether these boys and men were Democrats or Republicans because, thanks to the constant left shift of the political spectrum, most Democrats and Republicans in these days were politically to the right of Donald Trump or moderate Republicans today.
No, Antifa is a collection of radical leftists and admirers of Stalin and Mao who want to create a world that is not much different from the world that the Fascists wanted to create.
So, let’s call it not Antifa. Let’s call it what it really is: Prostata. The pro-Stalinist terror association.

The moderately extreme Left, the extremely extreme Left, indeed all of the unamerican American Left as well as black racists and white racist Democrats are going completely bananas these days.
They are going full Taliban / Islamic State.
Like these barbarians they are beginning to destroy all works of art that represent something they don’t like.
I have to ask all you leftist and antiwhite racists:
Why stop at confederate statues?
Why not destroy ALL symbols of slavery?
Why not blow up the pyramides of Egypt?
After all, the pyramides of Egypt are the biggests symbols of slavery.
They were build by slaves for the biggest, unapologetic slave owners, the pharaohs who viewed themselves as gods and the rest of humanity as slaves.
Don’t give me the crap that this would violate Egyptian or international law. You don’t care about the law anyway. You are already tearing down statues illegally.
That would be an act of violence? So what! You are already committing acts of violence by destroying art you don’t like.
So, you leftists out there, why don’t you call for President Trump to nuke these pyramides?
That would be too harsh? I here you. I here you.
That’s why you should volunteer to go to Egypt, pick in hand, and bring these evil symbols of slavery down with your own hands.
Have fun!

Some loose thoughts on current events.
Revenge was the topic of some of the great works of cinema and literature like “Ben Hur” and Alexandre Dumas’ “Count of Monte Christo”.
In 1974 the movie “Death Wish” which also had as its main theme the topic of revenge, was released.
Regardless of the controversy the movie had sparked and regardless of whatever you think of this movie, the movie highlighted the problem of rampant crime in America’s inner cities.
The Left’s hysteric reactions to the trailer for the movie’s 2017 remake are mindblowingly stupid.
How stupid has one to be to critize a movie that one has not seen because it isn’t even released yet?
That’s why I can only comment on what we already know about the movie.
The mere fact that more than 40 years after the original release you can still find American cities, in this case Chicago, which can serve as a realistic backdrop for the movies’ plot is damning to the Democrats who almost exclusively run these cities.
Secondly, the movie exposes the Left as utterly hypocritical.
The same Left that condemns the movie supports extrajudicial acts of revenge done by BLM and other radical groups. The only difference is that the movies’ main character is on a individual crusade of revenge while the Left’s favoured groups are doing it collectively as a raging mob. “No justice. No peace.”

This brings me to Europe where a massive wave of illegal, mostly muslim immigration causes a dramatic rise in rape, violent and non-violent crime.
Here in Germany the state is primarilly concerned with covering up the crime and producing statistcs that are minimizing the impact of this immigration wave that continues without any impediment.
The European elites who want everything run or controlled by the state are refusing to deal effectively with the crime by securing Europe’s borders and by deporting criminals.
That’s because they have a goal that is more important to them.
Unlike in real democracies where the people elects the goverment they are electing a new people. A people that, so they think, doesn’t have these antiquated notions of national souverignity, national self-determination and local governance. They are electing a people that, so they think, doesn’t stand in the way of the creation of a European superstate which already regulates the size and shape of bananas.
The Left which, thanks to the generally greater faith in the state by Europeans, has much deeper roots in Europe than it has in America is, unfortunately, much closer to its goal than it ever has been.
The Left does not trust the individual to run his own life because the flaws of the individual lead to all kinds of real or perceived problems like social injustice etc.
Therefore, in the view of the Left the state has to run and control everything.
But there is a fundamental error in this argument and it is this: Any state, no matter what kind of state, is run by a collection of individual persons with their own flaws and that is why no state can be the more just, better entity that the Left claims that it is.
To believe, as the Left claims that it does, that the state is better than the individual, it has to ascribe divine attributes of perfection that the individual lacks to the state, which makes the Left’s word view a religion. I call it etatheism (etat = state), the deification of the state.
Ironically, the people who have more faith in the state than the Americans, the Europeans, should have the least faith in the state because it was here in Europe, in Hitler’s Germany and in Stalin’s Russia where the state murdered its own citizens by the millions. It was in Mussolini’s fascist Italy and in Franco’s Spain where the state oppressed its citizens. It was in communist Eastern Europe where the state deprived its citizens of the most basic human rights and where it crushed the opposition with tanks and soldiers.
Flaws of individuals can have harmful and undesired effects but flaws of individuals who are collectively running states are magnified by orders of magnitude because of the state’s almost unlimited power and reach (compared to a single individual).
It is because of this great potential of the state to cause destruction and to prevent or diminish prosperity that the state needs to be as least powerful as possible and to interfere as least as possible in the individual’s affairs.
Leftists will, of course, counter my argument by saying that we can eliminate man’s flaws by creating a new system that will create a new man.
But again, the Left is stuck with the same problem. In order to create a flawless, perfect system which eliminates the flaws of the individual, the individuals who are creating the system have to be flawless and perfect themselves.
Again, one has to ascribe divine attributes of perfection to the persons devising such a system.
In the case of Marx we don’t have to guess. He was not only flawed. He was despicable.
While Marx was attacking capitalism for its exploitation of the working class he adopted for himself the lifestyle of an aristocrat and he sexually exploited his handmaiden Helen Demuth with whom he had an illegitimate child that he attributed to his friend Friedrich Engels who was willing to play his part in this charade.
While in exile in London, Marx was a paid informant for the Austrian police reporting on revolutionary exiles and getting 25$ for each bit of information.
One who he betrayed was Ruge, an intimate friend of Marx with whom he exchanged cordial letters.
Marx said some bad things about Jews and he called Blacks niggers.
He had no love for anyone and he was filled with rage. He never gave any indication that he particularilly cared for the working class.
In his poems Marx expressed his intense hatred for humanity and for God.
God he wanted to dethrone. The world he wanted to turn into ruins. Humanity he wanted to lead into the abyss.
These are just some of his flaws which are too many to mention here.
One flaw though that pops out among all the others was that he hardly ever worked in his life but that he always lived on other people’s money. From Engels alone he got six million French francs.
But whether it was his father’s money, his mother’s money or Engel’s money, it was never enough. Marx, born into a wealthy family, squandered it all and never could get enough of it. Does that sound familiar? Spending other people’s money and never getting enough of it?
Some view Marx as a genius economist but Marx lost much of his money at the stock exchange. So much for the genius economist.
Given all these flaws and Marx’s hatred for humanity and for God, marxism/communism is precisely the rotten, stinking, soul-crushing, freedom-robbing, impoverishing and murderous system we can expect it to be.

Back to the US.
I’ve never seen such hysteria and such a broad media propaganda campaign as I see with all the “Russia collusion” circus.
Granted, there are a parts of the Republicans who want Trump ousted from power, no matter how it’s done but the Democrats would go to any extreme to take President Trump out.
The Democrats pretend that they don’t like Putin.
If true, it’s certainly not because of Putin’s methods since the Democrats use or try to use exactly the same methods as Putin does in his “managed democracy”.
Both the Democrats and Putin share the same utter disregard for the will of the people. Both are running the state like the mafia. Both use the media as their propaganda arm. Both use the deep state as a weapon to destroy, criminalize and intimidate their adversaries. Both show no regard for the rule of law when it doesn’t serve their aims.
Ok, there is one difference but it’s just about the only one.
The Democrats are not yet killing their adversaries and they are not yet poisoning them with polonium.
But something tells me that the Left and the Democrats would not mind some nutjob killing President Trump.


Further useful information on Marx:
– “Marx and Satan” by Richard Wurmbrand.
– “Marx’s Path to Communism”, an excellent article by Murray N. Rothbard.



Dear Atheists, you keep complaining about religious symbols in the public sphere.
You insist on removing all traces of religion from the public space.
I wonder why you don’t want to remove the biggest symbol of religious interference in public life.
Perhaps it’s because it’s such a big fat symbol that it is hidden in plain sight.
It’s the Sunday.
As you should know, the concept of working six days and resting on the seventh day is a concept that is entirely rooted in judeochristian theology.
Seriously, if I was an atheist, I would be offended that, based on the teachings about an imaginary sky daddy, I would be forced to stay away from work on Sundays.
Now, I understand that it’s pretty hard for you to call for the abolishment of the Sunday.
That would make you hated by 95% of humanity.
But how about working on Sundays on a volontary basis?
If you are an employee you should call your boss. I’m shure he can make some arrangements for you. Perhaps home office …
What do I hear? Crickets? I just wonder why …

%d bloggers like this: