An informative interview

The Saker has an important interview with an expert sinologist, which addresses the current stare-down between the US-led globohomo hegemony and the Sino-Russian leadership of the nationalist resistance to it.

A Sino-Russian alliance has long been seen in both the U.S. and in Europe as one of the greatest threats to the West’s global primacy and to Western-led world order. As early as 1951 U.S. negotiators meeting with Chinese delegations to end the Korean War were instructed to focus on the differences in the positions of Moscow and Beijing in an attempt to form a rift between the two. Close Sino-Soviet cooperation seriously stifled Western designs for the Korean Peninsula and the wider region during that period, and it was repeatedly emphasized that the key to a Western victory was to bring about a Sino-Soviet split. Achieving this goal by the early 1960s and bringing the two powers very near to a total conflict significantly increased prospects for a Western victory in the Cold War, with the end of the previously united front seriously undermining nationalist and leftist movements opposing Western designs from Africa and the Middle East to Vietnam and Korea. Both states learned the true consequences of this in the late 1980s and early 1990s when there was a real risk of total collapse under Western pressure. Attempts to bring an end to China’s national revolution through destabilization failed in 1989, although the USSR was less fortunate and the results for the Russian population in the following decade were grave indeed.

Today the Sino-Russian partnership has become truly comprehensive, and while Western experts from Henry Kissinger to the late Zbigniew Brzezinski among others have emphasized the importance of bringing about a new split in this partnership this strategy remains unlikely to work a second time. Both Beijing and Moscow learned from the dark period of the post-Cold War years that the closer they are together the safer they will be, and that any rift between them will only provide their adversaries with the key to bringing about their downfall. It is difficult to comprehend the importance of the Sino-Russian partnership for the security of both states without understanding the enormity of the Western threat – with maximum pressure being exerted on multiple fronts from finance and information to military and cyberspace. Where in the early 1950s it was only the Soviet nuclear deterrent which kept both states safe from very real Western plans for massive nuclear attacks, so too today is the synergy in the respective strengths of China and Russia key to protecting the sovereignty and security of the two nations from a very real and imminent threat. A few examples of the nature of this threat include growing investments in social engineering through social media – the results of have been seen in Hong Kong, Taiwan and Ukraine, a lowering threshold for nuclear weapons use by the United States – which it currently trains Western allies outside the NPT to deploy, and even reports from Russian and Korean sources of investments in biological warfare – reportedly being tested in Georgia, Eastern Europe and South Korea.

The partnership between Russia and China has become truly comprehensive, and is perhaps best exemplified by their military relations. From 2016 joint military exercises have involved the sharing of extremely sensitive information on missile and early warning systems – one of the most well kept defense secrets of any nuclear power which even NATO powers do not share with one another. Russia’s defense sector has played a key role in the modernization of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army, while Chinese investment has been essential to allowing Russia to continue research and development on next generation systems needed to retain parity with the United States. There is reportedly cooperation between the two in developing next generation weapons technologies for systems such as hypersonic cruise and anti aircraft missiles and new strategic bombers and fighter jets which both states plan to field by the mid-2020s. With the combined defense spending of both states a small fraction of that of the Western powers, which themselves cooperate closely in next generation defense projects, it is logical that the two should pool their resources and research and development efforts to most efficiently advance their own security.

Remember, the world is not binary. The fact that the globohomo hegemony is pure satanic evil does not mean that either the Chinese or the Russians are good guys. But at least they don’t eat people and molest children, and in the case of the Russians, hate Jesus Christ and persecute Christians.

Needless to say, Vladimir Putin’s remarks on the failure of liberalism and globalism are quite pertinent here:

 So, the liberal idea has become obsolete. It has come into conflict with the interests of the overwhelming majority of the population. 

The liberal idea failed the West because it proved to be directly contradictory to all three pillars of the West, Christianity, the European nations, and the Greco-Roman legal and philosophic legacies. It was, in the end, intrinsically anti-Western.


Losing the next war, part 37

“The Air Force considers diversity to be one of our greatest assets.” 
– USAF spokesman Maj. Nicholas Mercurio

I’m sure the Chinese and Russians are quaking in their Chengdu J-20s and  S-500 Prometeys at the thought of that mighty USAF diversity.


Mexico First

On the other hand, President Trump would be much more able to run against the lunatic Democratic program if he couldn’t so readily be accused of following an Israel First program:

President Trump blasted the contestants in the second Democratic presidential debate on Thursday when they all declared their support for health care coverage for undocumented immigrants.

All of the candidates — including former Vice President Joe Biden, Sen. Kamala Harris and South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg — raised their hands when asked by an NBC moderator if they would support a health care plan that would cover undocumented immigrants.

“All Democrats just raised their hands for giving millions of illegal aliens unlimited healthcare,” Trump wrote on Twitter from Japan, where he is to attend the G20 Summit.

“How about taking care of American Citizens first!? That’s the end of that race!”

How about it, Mr. President? Israel has a wall. Where is America’s big, beautiful wall? What ever happened to America First? Still, the ineptitude is astonishing.

Moderator: If you can only get one issue through, what would it be?

  • Swallwell: Ending gun violence.
  • Bennett: Climate change, and the lack of economic mobility.
  • Gillibrand: “Family Bill of Rights,” paid-leave plan, universal pre-K, daycare.
  • Kamala Harris: Tax cut for middle/working class. DACA. Guns.
  • Bernie: “We need a political revolution against the special interests!”
  • Biden: Defeat Trump.
  • Buttigieg: “Fix our democracy, before it’s too late.”
  • Yang: $1,000 Freedom Dividend for every American adult, starting at age 18.
  • Hickenlooper: Climate change.
  • Williamson: I admire the Prime Minister of New Zealand.
Williamson’s response is my favorite. It’s one step above “I like Oreos.” Although the inability of the other three women to grasp what “one issue” means is also amusing.

One less arrow in the quiver

An invasionist laments the fact that the visual rhetoric isn’t working as designed anymore:

You may look at this photo and think that its deep message is “We are all hoping for a better life and will take extraordinary risks on behalf of those we love.” But someone else will probably say, “People shouldn’t cross borders without permission.” The drowning becomes a kind of punishment, a river stands in for ideas of human authority, and the photograph doesn’t break through anything. It merely reiterates an old and cherished belief: Bad things happen to those who break the rules. … there will be efforts to make it an allegory of law and judgment rather than an opportunity for moral imagination and compassion.

The day after these two people perished in the Rio Grande, the president of the United States dismissed an accusation that he had sexually assaulted a prominent author and columnist in the 1990s. He used a phrase similar to ones he has used in the past to deflect similar allegations: “She’s not my type.” It is a terrible thing to say, with a specifically misogynistic meaning in the context of how men practice violence against women.

But it is a perfect summation of our new and deformed American conscience. It is pithy and dismissive, an invitation to look at people who have been victimized and see only otherness. It shuts down any understanding of trauma before empathy has begun to interrogate how trauma is felt and experienced. It is about looking without seeing, judging without understanding. For anyone who wants an off-ramp to the moral demands made by this image, this could be the universal caption: “They weren’t our type.”

Translation: Did you not see the DROWNED LITTLE KID? How can you not submit to our insane immigration policies when we are showing you pictures of a DROWNED LITTLE KID! And WITH HER DADDY no less! FFS, what do we have to do, drown an entire kindergarten class of refugees just to evoke the desired Pavlovian reaction from you heartless bastards!

The title kind of gives it away. “We used to think photos like this could change the world.” That’s just it. They did. But that was before people began to recognize that they were being rhetorically manipulated.


Unauthorized medieval history

Unauthorized.tv is pleased to present Episode I in Prof. Rachel Fulton Brown’s Medieval History 101 series, entitled Getting Medieval on Medieval History. The history series is for subscribers, but the first episode is free for everyone. The course guide and a recommended reading list is available here. This should further demonstrate Unauthorized’s commitment to continuously raising the intellectual bar in the service of the Good, the Beautiful, and the True. In my experience, one of the best ways to avoid being deceived is to know history. There is, as we are told, very little that is new under the sun, and the deceptions that are being put into practice today have often been utilized in the past.

And if you’re not a subscriber yet, but you want to support more of these video projects, you can get on board here.

UPDATE: The supporting blog post, with references.


Listen to His Holiness

The Dalai Lama is not only a big hitter, he speaks more truth than all the politicians and corrupt churchmen of Europe combined:

The Dalai Lama has claimed ‘Europe is for Europeans’ and that the continent could become ‘Muslim or African’ if migrants are not sent back to their home countries. The Buddhist spiritual leader, who has been living as a refugee in India since fleeing Tibet in 1959, said only a ‘limited number’ of migrants should be allowed to remain.

During an interview with the BBC, the Dalai Lama added that refugees who have fled to Europe should be given skills before being returned. He said Europe was under an obligation to take in those who needed help, but ultimately they should be returned to their homelands. The 83-year-old said: ‘European countries should take these refugees and give them education and training, and the aim is return to their own land with certain skills.’

When asked what should happen to those who want to stay in their adopted countries, he replied: ‘A limited number is OK, but the whole of Europe [will] eventually become Muslim country, African country – impossible.’

He’s almost entirely correct. Because the only alternative is the continent-wide war between the European nations and the migrants, refugees, and quislings that appears to have already begun in Norway and in Germany.

The only point at which I disagree with His Holiness is the idea that Europe has any obligation to take in anyone for any reason. Neither the continent nor the people who live on it are obligated to do so under any moral standard.


Links in the comments

Please note that this site is not a message board. No one is asking you to bring anything to everyone’s attention. And if it is on the Drudge Report or IG News, then you can safely assume that everyone here has already seen it. Now please stop posting off-topic links in the comments or I will tell the moderators to delete all links posted there.


Seriously, stop eating people

So much for the “dehydration” story. Who do these idiots think they are fooling anyhow?

Angela Merkel has been seen shaking uncontrollably for the second time this month as fears grow for the 64-year-old German Chancellor’s health. Mrs Merkel’s arms and body could be seen noticeably trembling as she met Germany’s President Frank-Walter Steinmeier today.

She continually folded her arms in an apparent attempt to stop her hands and body from violently juddering. Close-up footage showed the difficulty she was having trying to keep the quivering under control as she gripped her arms together.

However, her spokesman claimed soon after that the German chancellor was ‘fine’.

It comes 10 days after she blamed dehydration for the shakes she suffered during a meeting with visiting Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy.

But it’s little wonder that the German government-media complex is attempting to keep Merkel’s physical deterioration under wraps, when the war for the country has already begun.

Suspect Stephan E. has admitted to the killing of conservative politician Walter Lübcke, Federal Prosecutor General Peter Frank told members of Germany’s parliament on Wednesday morning. Head of a regional government in the city of Kassel, Lübcke was found dead outside his home with a gunshot wound to the head on June 2. The 65-year-old was a member of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU).

News magazine Der Spiegel reported that Stephan E. told police the killing was triggered by remarks made by Lübcke during a townhall meeting in October 2015, on the creation of a new refugee reception center. Facing hecklers during the meeting, Lübcke said: “It is worth living in our country. Here you must stand up for values, and whoever doesn’t stand up for these values can leave this country any time if they don’t agree with them.”

But where are those Germans who don’t stand up for those self-destructive values supposed to go? Was it not always obvious that at least some of them were going to choose to stay and fight for their nation instead? As we have been repeatedly warned, there will be war.


He has to go back

Both the US Left and the US Right can agree on one thing: everyone hates the neoclown Ben Shapiro.

It is a mystery why Shapiro has any audience at all, considering his highly irritating way of speaking, jabbering away like angry chipmunk, but some powerful people REALLY want these views out there, so they push him hard, … but we digress.

Shapiro’s audience are boomers, Jews, and other assorted not too bright conservatives who have a high tolerance for nails scratching on a chalk board.

And even they aren’t buying his warmongering.

He really is getting completely DESTROYED in the comments. The negative ratio is nearly 9:1. And these aren’t people who realize that the Littlest Chickenhawk has been calling for war with Iran since 2005!


Slowly, they began to grok

Whitecloak finally understands:

These threads have made me sick of the MGTOW, hedonist, etc. contingents. I think I understand why VD doesn’t want to take the time to deal with gammas now. Gammas are fucking tiresome.

My perspective on gammas is fundamentally Aristotelian.

“Before some audiences not even the possession of the exactest knowledge will make it easy for what we say to produce conviction. For argument based on knowledge implies instruction, and there are people whom one cannot instruct.” 

Gammas spend their entire lives constructing delusion bubbles capable of preventing facts, logic, and readily observable information from entering their minds. Literally nothing is capable of even getting through to them, much less persuading them, until their delusion bubble pops and they finally admit their social failure and desperate unhappiness to themselves.

They literally are not worth the time it requires to deal with them. That’s why I simply ignore them and don’t hesitate to ban them the moment they start acting up. They have nothing to offer but self-justification, which is why they attempt to turn every discussion towards themselves.