[HardcoreSexpatMotherfucker]

As I see it most Europeans will flee Moslem attacks, not fight. They have been too comfortable, for too long. I will take a decade or two of warfare for them to regain some balls and finall kick the Moslems out.

And they have no ideology at all. All this neo-nationalism of today is made of cardboard, it's just low-class populism. The current nation-states are outdated concepts but nobody what to replace them with.

Meanwhile the Indians are started to get seriously pissed off at that Moslem cancer as well, so the moment might coincide when in 30 years or so it will get kicked both out of West and East.

Yeah that remains the objective:

(11-08-2017 04:37 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  

(11-07-2017 11:29 AM)balybary Wrote:  

The question is when the war will begin.

I want this to happen.

[XXL]

@redpillage

I know it's all a part of some big plan. I'm familiar with Ventotene manifesto which author is quoted in the EU headoffice in Brussel. I know they try to kill all signs of nationality and patriotism in people of EU countries and destruct values people used to to live by here.

But what's the actual end goal of this mess for people on top? One state? Communism 2.0?

[redpillage]

(11-09-2017 05:53 AM)HardcoreSexpatMotherfucker Wrote:  

The current nation-states are outdated concepts but nobody [knows?] what to replace them with.

Please explain to me why exactly nation states are outdated concepts. We've got 195 of them covering four continents at the current time.

[redpillage]

(11-09-2017 01:38 AM)sterling_archer Wrote:  

(11-08-2017 11:22 PM)Kid Twist Wrote:  

Still, the odds that anyone in his 30s or higher doesn't see a major war in his lifetime is essentially nil, in my estimation.

I am not so sure. I am not in 30s, but 20s and from what I see people are totally oblivious around me. I somehow doubt they will change their views when they hit 30s, especially when their lives are just doing mundane stuff with no critical thinking of affairs that happen regularly around them.

Quite frankly I am repeatedly stunned to realize how fucking clueless over 90% of the people around me are. I don't even try to engage them anymore on an intellectual level unless they demonstrate a basic level of awareness and education (not indoctrination). So I simply play stupid and smile while pulling one of my boiler plate platitudes that seem to make them happy and feel validated.

I don't really enjoy acting like a fucking snob but the older I get the more I tire of everyone around me. Very rarely do I meet a person who truly seems to be awake and exhibits an iota of intelligence and critical thinking. If it wasn't for this forum I would have probably gone over the past few years.

[Samseau]

(11-09-2017 01:38 AM)sterling_archer Wrote:  

(11-08-2017 11:22 PM)Kid Twist Wrote:  

Still, the odds that anyone in his 30s or higher doesn't see a major war in his lifetime is essentially nil, in my estimation.

I am not so sure. I am not in 30s, but 20s and from what I see people are totally oblivious around me. I somehow doubt they will change their views when they hit 30s, especially when their lives are just doing mundane stuff with no critical thinking of affairs that happen regularly around them.

No, all the more dangerous if they are sheep. They do whatever their propaganda outlets tell them to do; today is be a timid sheep, tomorrow is it genocide. A cowed populace is one of the most dangerous.

However, I am not sure we will see wars to "take back" old Europe, I expect to see wars in the middle of nowhere to benefit a few rich guys on the backs of proles. 1984 style all the way

[Parzival]

It's strange when people think what to do at a Zombie Apocalypse but are blind to see when at almost every street corner, park or public place in bigger cities are covered by migrant men.
How complete districts change and the original people move silent away. The old and the poor stay behind. How the police can go in certain areas just with high force and at the end they just take notes with no arrests because the courts betray them.
How you can slip in with no paper, commit crimes and then not face consequences or deportation. How the people still talk the nonsense about skilled workers when all the numbers proof them wrong. Its like a collective madness. We have a climate of this society where reason is denied. Imagine you are jewish in Germany in 1933, just a few did realize that things will change to worse. They got laugh at, and the potential dangers got ignored and played down. Most people follow the masses. You can compare it to the Matrix, if they are still connected they are the enemy. If you want it a little bit more scientific take the Milgram Experiment. In the right conditions most people can harm the one next to one, even when they are nice at the moment. We will face some intense change.

[nek]

(11-09-2017 03:15 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(11-09-2017 01:38 AM)sterling_archer Wrote:  

(11-08-2017 11:22 PM)Kid Twist Wrote:  

Still, the odds that anyone in his 30s or higher doesn't see a major war in his lifetime is essentially nil, in my estimation.

I am not so sure. I am not in 30s, but 20s and from what I see people are totally oblivious around me. I somehow doubt they will change their views when they hit 30s, especially when their lives are just doing mundane stuff with no critical thinking of affairs that happen regularly around them.

No, all the more dangerous if they are sheep. They do whatever their propaganda outlets tell them to do; today is be a timid sheep, tomorrow is it genocide. A cowed populace is one of the most dangerous.

However, I am not sure we will see wars to "take back" old Europe, I expect to see wars in the middle of nowhere to benefit a few rich guys on the backs of proles. 1984 style all the way

I think this is normally the case, however the ability for the populace to be placated is greater than ever with technology and modern food/drugs, keeping people just comfortable enough, regardless of how disgruntled they man be.

As for the "middle of nowhere", those new wars are going to be fought in Africa, where a new land grab is occurring.

[Royalist and Legitimist]

(11-09-2017 01:58 PM)redpillage Wrote:  

(11-09-2017 01:38 AM)sterling_archer Wrote:  

(11-08-2017 11:22 PM)Kid Twist Wrote:  

Still, the odds that anyone in his 30s or higher doesn't see a major war in his lifetime is essentially nil, in my estimation.

I am not so sure. I am not in 30s, but 20s and from what I see people are totally oblivious around me. I somehow doubt they will change their views when they hit 30s, especially when their lives are just doing mundane stuff with no critical thinking of affairs that happen regularly around them.

Quite frankly I am repeatedly stunned to realize how fucking clueless over 90% of the people around me are. I don't even try to engage them anymore on an intellectual level unless they demonstrate a basic level of awareness and education (not indoctrination). So I simply play stupid and smile while pulling one of my boiler plate platitudes that seem to make them happy and feel validated.

I don't really enjoy acting like a fucking snob but the older I get the more I tire of everyone around me. Very rarely do I meet a person who truly seems to be awake and exhibits an iota of intelligence and critical thinking. If it wasn't for this forum I would have probably gone over the past few years.

I feel the same, just the other day I found myself explaining to an American college girl what the European Union is and that Britain is not an absolute monarchy. When it comes to redpilling people who don't even understand such basic things (yet graduated from public school and have been accepted into university somehow), I am lost. I just stopped bothering.

[Scuba_Instructor]

(11-09-2017 01:58 PM)redpillage Wrote:  

(11-09-2017 01:38 AM)sterling_archer Wrote:  

(11-08-2017 11:22 PM)Kid Twist Wrote:  

Still, the odds that anyone in his 30s or higher doesn't see a major war in his lifetime is essentially nil, in my estimation.

I am not so sure. I am not in 30s, but 20s and from what I see people are totally oblivious around me. I somehow doubt they will change their views when they hit 30s, especially when their lives are just doing mundane stuff with no critical thinking of affairs that happen regularly around them.

Quite frankly I am repeatedly stunned to realize how fucking clueless over 90% of the people around me are. I don't even try to engage them anymore on an intellectual level unless they demonstrate a basic level of awareness and education (not indoctrination). So I simply play stupid and smile while pulling one of my boiler plate platitudes that seem to make them happy and feel validated.

I don't really enjoy acting like a fucking snob but the older I get the more I tire of everyone around me. Very rarely do I meet a person who truly seems to be awake and exhibits an iota of intelligence and critical thinking. If it wasn't for this forum I would have probably gone over the past few years.

You're doing better than me. I can't even muster the effort to play stupid these days. I used to do the old 48 Laws of Power rule of 'think what you like, but behave as others do'. Now I just completely switch off. I carry a book or ipod with me at all times so I can actively avoid having to engage with the majority of people I come across in my current day-to-day life.

[Razor Beast]

(11-08-2017 07:57 AM)XXL Wrote:  

Very probable.

Europe is too rich village to exist safely. It has no army no borders and represents no valid principles that people might want to fight for.

Really nasty conflict will take place when a muslim becomes high figure with high power in one of the countries. Can happen within next 10-15 years.

However I still think that there is some sort of big plan behind all of this mess. People with so much power are not stupid. It must be on purpose. You know the best way to introduce new order or some kind of revolution is to create big crisis ie manufacture it somehow.

The theory behind pushing mass migration is that they know it will create major social unrest and a world war down the road which will allow them to do the big reset of the global economy and bring in the solution which will be the one world government/new world order. It benefits the global elites because it allows their power to become even more concentrated and farther reaching.

[Razor Beast]

(11-10-2017 04:17 PM)Royalist and Legitimist Wrote:  

(11-09-2017 01:58 PM)redpillage Wrote:  

(11-09-2017 01:38 AM)sterling_archer Wrote:  

(11-08-2017 11:22 PM)Kid Twist Wrote:  

Still, the odds that anyone in his 30s or higher doesn't see a major war in his lifetime is essentially nil, in my estimation.

I am not so sure. I am not in 30s, but 20s and from what I see people are totally oblivious around me. I somehow doubt they will change their views when they hit 30s, especially when their lives are just doing mundane stuff with no critical thinking of affairs that happen regularly around them.

Quite frankly I am repeatedly stunned to realize how fucking clueless over 90% of the people around me are. I don't even try to engage them anymore on an intellectual level unless they demonstrate a basic level of awareness and education (not indoctrination). So I simply play stupid and smile while pulling one of my boiler plate platitudes that seem to make them happy and feel validated.

I don't really enjoy acting like a fucking snob but the older I get the more I tire of everyone around me. Very rarely do I meet a person who truly seems to be awake and exhibits an iota of intelligence and critical thinking. If it wasn't for this forum I would have probably gone over the past few years.

I feel the same, just the other day I found myself explaining to an American college girl what the European Union is and that Britain is not an absolute monarchy. When it comes to redpilling people who don't even understand such basic things (yet graduated from public school and have been accepted into university somehow), I am lost. I just stopped bothering.

The goal of college education in the 21st century is to indoctrinate not educate. Critical thinking is completely absent from the undergraduate curriculum. Students are more concerned with rote recitation to get the highest grade possible than to actually engage in evidence and fact based discourse to achieve personal development.

[nomadbrah]

(11-09-2017 01:50 PM)redpillage Wrote:  

(11-09-2017 05:53 AM)HardcoreSexpatMotherfucker Wrote:  

The current nation-states are outdated concepts but nobody [knows?] what to replace them with.

Please explain to me why exactly nation states are outdated concepts. We've got 195 of them covering four continents at the current time.

Some nation states are outdated.

France, Spain, Italy, Belgium, Great Britain, they're remnants of empires.

The future will be ethno-cultural smaller nationstates united in larger federations replacing the nationstates. You might have Catalonia going independent but remaining within some Spanish federation, mostly involved in defending the country and such things.

This is a good and natural development.

[uncledick]

(11-09-2017 10:45 AM)XXL Wrote:  

@redpillage

I know it's all a part of some big plan. I'm familiar with Ventotene manifesto which author is quoted in the EU headoffice in Brussel. I know they try to kill all signs of nationality and patriotism in people of EU countries and destruct values people used to to live by here.

But what's the actual end goal of this mess for people on top? One state? Communism 2.0?

Import millions of muslims for the last thirty years and for the next 30 years while supporting them in everyway imaginable. This agitates the "natives" and nationalists. Suddenly one day, all at once, every media outlet and intellectual figure says kill the muslims! Apparently they've raped and terrorized, oh and they don't like gays and trannies! gotta protect them. Native libtards and nationalists alike eventually fight the muslims until both sides are exhausted and fragments of their former selves. Then the divine trinity of globohomocorps/bankers/bureaucrats swoop in to save the day (will they use Chinese troops?) and initiate their Brave New World/1984 (with robots) redux.

This is short version, there will twists, but to me its as clear as day.

I think present day china is their foundation for this new world, but even more restrictive and of course spanning globally.

[redpillage]

(11-10-2017 08:55 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  

(11-09-2017 01:50 PM)redpillage Wrote:  

(11-09-2017 05:53 AM)HardcoreSexpatMotherfucker Wrote:  

The current nation-states are outdated concepts but nobody [knows?] what to replace them with.

Please explain to me why exactly nation states are outdated concepts. We've got 195 of them covering four continents at the current time.

Some nation states are outdated.

France, Spain, Italy, Belgium, Great Britain, they're remnants of empires.

The future will be ethno-cultural smaller nationstates united in larger federations replacing the nationstates. You might have Catalonia going independent but remaining within some Spanish federation, mostly involved in defending the country and such things.

This is a good and natural development.

This is a horrible idea and doesn't make sense from a cultural, anthropological, financial, and political perspective.

• Mixing of diverse culture destroys all but the most dominant one.
• Mixing of cultures creates internal friction and constant conflict. You are basically fixing one problem (external conflict) with another (internal conflict).
• Human civilications operate best in multi layered groupings extending from the family to the neighborhood, to the city, to the region, to the state, to the nation.
• True diversity is like cooking a meal. It does not mean throwing all ingredients into a blender and mixing it all up. The goal is to create various sub regions with distinct components that complement each other, e.g. meat, potatoes, vegetables, etc.
• Economically and financially speaking large regions do not function well. A good example is the European Union which is now being dominated by Germany due to its superior economic output. In part this has also led to the political chaos that's now taking place within the EU. A common currency is not a bad idea and may have worked had they stopped there. But forcing various regions to abide by the same standards will rarely work well and the United States is a very rare exception due to its unique history. And even there we see dominant forces attempting to control others or dismissing them as irrelevant, e.g. California and New York.
• Once there are no more separate countries, where will you run? What happens when that large mega nation turns fascist or Marxist? E.g. the Soviet Union or Communist China? It will be very difficult to get out for one and if you succed you will be very grateful that there are alternatives to pick from. And that does not just extend to Capitalism - if you are a rabid Communist you will be happy to turn to placs like North Korea or Cuba.
• I have not seen/heard one good argument against nation states and the recurring rethoric revolves around it being 'antiquated' or 'obsolete'. What exactly are you basing this perspective on? Surely there is no precedence for this every having taken place and given the above I do not see any good argument supporting the concept.
  

[911]

(11-08-2017 04:40 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  

(11-07-2017 08:12 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(11-07-2017 05:19 PM)RIslander Wrote:  

(11-07-2017 02:37 PM)bojangles Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 09:01 PM)Laska Wrote:  

This wouldn't be like Hitler, this would be largely a civil war: more brutal and twisted than even WW2 was.

It will be a civil war fought on religious and racial level. That much is becoming evident.

I doubt that. Nations don't fight wars for ideals, they fight for power. Religious and racial violence committed by regular citizens will be riots at most. War won't occur unless the powers at be believe it is to their advantage.

The American revolution is the perfect example. It's romanticized as patriots rising up against an oppressive government, which in many ways it was, but it was organized and eventually successful because powerful people stood to benefit.

There's actually many instances of poor men rising up and channel the anger of regular men. For example, Hitler, Stalin, Mao Zedong were all poor. Many other such examples.

Additionally, when there's a need then someone will rise to the occasion. If lots of people are angry about immigration or religious persecution, a powerful man will determine he has much to gain by building an army with them.

So as long as the popular will agrees on a position, the odds of some man taking the reins of the movement are extremely high.

"There is no stopping an idea whose time has come."

Hitler was aided by rich Bavarian elites though.

"Poor men rising up to channel the anger of regular men" is the cover story. As Nomad mentioned, Hitler was backed by the likes of the Krups, IB Farben. He did have popular backing though.

Mao was a western deep state product, he was groomed by Skull and Bones and the Yale in China organization, and the Communists were covertly armed and backed by the OAS against the Nationalists.

The Bolcheviks were also financed by Wall Street and European banksters, the "proletariat" in the Russia was not a significant segment, it was mostly a rural, traditional country. Same pattern as in the French Revolution, a bourgeois masonic movement centered in Paris designed to destroy the traditional monarchy, followed by wide scale massacres. The difference between France and Russia is that the Grande Terreur didn't last decades, so the body count was smaller.

[RoastBeefCurtains4Me]

I think it's a little of both. The lower class leaders and popular support really were organic. It's true they couldn't have succeeded without having allies in the elites to supply money and weapons, and then to bring their sectors of the economy in line to support the new regime. However, I think these elites are primarily being opportunistic.

I don't think the elites were able to engineer things like the French, Soviet, or Chinese revolutions to the point they were the prime movers. There were significant forces present in each society across multiple social classes where they felt they had something to gain from overthrowing the old order. Each of these revolutions was very chaotic. There's no way some faction of the elite was able to plan and implement these revolutions as is sometimes claimed.

[911]

Power is concentrated at the top, in the capitals. You don't have to have deep grassroots support in order to effect regime change/revolutions. If you take over the levers (executive, banks, media, top army brass) and have enough capital to fund the upper and middle echelons, you've got it done. The reason communist regimes in Russia and China had to kill tens of millions is that their popular support wasn't strong, they had to cull and terrorize the masses that they pretend to represent. In France, the revolution faded back into a traditionalist, nationalist regime of Napoleon.

History is written by the winners, so these revolutionary events will invariably be portrayed as organic popular movements in the history books and in popular culture, it's hard for me to challenge that notion here, but if you do your research you will find out that things weren't as they are portrayed.

[Kid Twist]

(11-10-2017 07:32 PM)Razor Beast Wrote:  

(11-08-2017 07:57 AM)XXL Wrote:  

Very probable.

Europe is too rich village to exist safely. It has no army no borders and represents no valid principles that people might want to fight for.

Really nasty conflict will take place when a muslim becomes high figure with high power in one of the countries. Can happen within next 10-15 years.

However I still think that there is some sort of big plan behind all of this mess. People with so much power are not stupid. It must be on purpose. You know the best way to introduce new order or some kind of revolution is to create big crisis ie manufacture it somehow.

The theory behind pushing mass migration is that they know it will create major social unrest and a world war down the road which will allow them to do the big reset of the global economy and bring in the solution which will be the one world government/new world order. It benefits the global elites because it allows their power to become even more concentrated and farther reaching.

Are you going to change your handle to "Mark of the" RB?

[BoiBoi]

(11-11-2017 07:09 PM)911 Wrote:  

"Poor men rising up to channel the anger of regular men" is the cover story. As Nomad mentioned, Hitler was backed by the likes of the Krups, IB Farben. He did have popular backing though.

True. Also often forgotten but some of Adolf's main financiers were Wall Street and Henry Ford.

[Hypno]

Here is something that is not well understood about the finances in the EU.

Each country has their own banks. Banks in Europe, like anywhere else, are highly leveraged.

Historically banking rules had fixed percentages of leverage that were allowed. Shortly after the beginning of this century, banking in North America and Europe switched to risk-based leverage rules, under something called the Basel accord. What this means is that every asset on a bank's balance sheet is ranked according to risk. If all they have is cash and government bonds, they can be more leveraged than say holding real estate loans.

Here's where it gets interested. Risk based leverage makes sense in theory, but in practice politics intrudes and it goes all facaca. So lets say you have a bank that holds mostly government bonds. The leverage allowed is very high. However, in the EU government bonds are issued by individual countries, Germany, Italy, etc. You can buy the bonds of the weaker countries, like Italy, a little cheaper, so your rate is better, and that is what a lot of French banks did. However, the Italians and Greeks are no longer benefitting from being in the EU and want to leave so they can have their own currency back. If they leave, they will devalue their currency (lira and drachma) relative to the Euro, and when they do those French banks are going to have huge losses, so huge that they may fail.

So as the economic imbalances mount, there is considerable local pressure for the Southern Europeans to leave and start their own currencies, and among some Northern Europeans like France to keep them locked in.

These forces have been apparrent since 2008, but they have kicked the can down the road. I'm not saying this situation is immiment, only inevitable.

[Leonard D Neubache]

At some point you realise that the creditors are the creditees. It's not like your world or mine where if you default on a loan then the bank kicks into gear and puts a lien on your car or your house.

If one major bank goes then all go, but it's not going to happen precisely for that reason.

All these banks are part of a greater power structure. On a smaller scale Guido says "yeah, I've got 100k, I loaned it to Ralphie" and Ralphie says "yeah, I've got 100k, I loaned it to Jimmy", and Jimmy says "yeah, I've got 100k, I loaned it to Guido".

All of them leverage that same 100k to buy out 300k worth of businesses and take over the neighbourhood. Why would they default by calling each other out on the loans?

The bogeyman of default will be dangled in front of feckless taxpayers and anti-globalists alike, to milk the former and convince the latter to build bunkers in the forest rather than stand up and fight. Between the bankers and the bosses of every national Federal reserve (but I repeat myself) they are in no danger of defaulting. If things ever got dicey they would just yank another 100billion of national debt and threaten the normies with the prospect of waking up to a Mad Max scenario on monday if they didn't pay up.

And the gutless normies will grumble, but they will pay. They will be wiping their asses with worthless hundred dollar bills before they choose a truly hard winter or two.

[Richard Turpin]

One thing that puzzles me is how exactly Germany can afford to hold up the EU. I get that they are something of an economic powerhouse, but in recent memory (the former) West Germany has had to pump money into (the former) East Germany in order to ease and maintain unification.

Then it has to carry most of the load for Greece, Italy, Spain, Romania, Bulgaria ....

On top of that, I'm sure I read that Germany still pays reparations money following WW2 (to individuals rather than countries?)

With the UK leaving the EU, they will lose their 3rd or 4th biggest contributor (15% or thereabouts of all contributions).

I just don't see how one country can cope under such financial pressure, just by selling nice cars?

[Obermarschall]

What I see are multiple problems... but I will try to sum it up in few categories:

- Education (no critical thinking, no financial 'literacy', indoctrination)
- Financial system (interests especially)
- Multiculturalism (especially in regards with Islam)
- NWO (nations and borders are dissolved in favour of a global superstate)

*Education:
Schools and universities used to teach people valuable stuff. However, their level was also very different back than. You had to study very hard and teacher were much more authoritarian, which I think is not so bad. With the 68-movement, 'authorities' were seen as the devil in person. You have to challenge authorities, teachers are toxic, authoritarian parents are toxic, everything with authority according to the 68-movement is toxic and thus the backbone of most authorities have been broken and what we see is the massive amount of soyboys, betas and cuckolds. Everything became openly left-indoctrinated and it didn't start with the 68's! It started already with the Frankfurt School. Due to the strong influence of the Frankfurt School, literally EVERYWHERE Marx spread like a fungus. In every institution it was inevitable to at least have to write once about Marx. Nowadays you have WHOLE SUBJECTS based on Marx... Other philosophers, schools of thoughts are wiped out and the only places left in the West, are unfortunately only some youtube channels, forums or virtual stuff online where Marx can be 'challenged'. Just the fact that I have to talk about Marx shows how bad our education system became.

Furthermore I want to add, that critical thinking as the school always taught me, is not critical thinking. It is just reading a text, rewriting it and afterwards embellishing it with a left-indoctrinated conclusion. Wow, so critical! The teachers give you an A+... However, when I dared to challenge it and actually came up with my own ideas... I always got this weird look from everyone, like what the hell am I talking... I remember in philosophy classes we had a debate about 'how women were always oppressed'. I said that men are oppressed too, most work accidents happen to men, suicide rates among men are higher, men are always seen as the violent one, when a woman hits a man in a movie it's seen as fun (do the contrary and OMG such a bastard, white knights will start rebelling!) you get the point. The funny part was, they knew I was right, but tried to kick my ideas smoothly off from the discussion, by just saying hm yes it's true and moving on to another topic.

Financial education is non-existant in our schools. Everyone takes it as normal situation to live almost all your lives in debts and to work your ass off just to pay the bank. 'But the house is mine', 'but the car is mine', 'but i need this new smartphone', sure it is yours as long as the bank allows it to be yours. But who cares, it is better to have zombies coming out from these indoctrination camps who pay, who don't ask questions and just do as they are told too. Not too stupid, to execute orders and not too smart to question those orders + if you dare to rise up...hm debts will appear, taxes appear (who wants to read those dry, boring laws about finances and WORSE teach it at schools), you get the picture.

*Financial system:
To be continued

[Leonard D Neubache]

(11-13-2018 05:23 AM)Richard Turpin Wrote:  

One thing that puzzles me is how exactly Germany can afford to hold up the EU. I get that they are something of an economic powerhouse, but in recent memory (the former) West Germany has had to pump money into (the former) East Germany in order to ease and maintain unification.

Then it has to carry most of the load for Greece, Italy, Spain, Romania, Bulgaria ....

On top of that, I'm sure I read that Germany still pays reparations money following WW2 (to individuals rather than countries?)

With the UK leaving the EU, they will lose their 3rd or 4th biggest contributor (15% or thereabouts of all contributions).

I just don't see how one country can cope under such financial pressure, just by selling nice cars?

Less than a third the population of America, in ruins after WW2 (opposite of America) and unlike America, does not print the reserve currency of the world.

It's fair to assume at some point that monetary policy is all just a shell game run by people with a million shells and 999,999 arms. A trillion dollars gets siphoned out of the Pentagon and it gets memory holed after 9/11. Via fractional reserve banking at a reserve rate of 5% it can functionally be laundered at the highest levels and turned into roughly 95 trillion worth of debt. Imagine stealing a trillion bucks and then leveraging it to create more than the entire GDP of the whole world.

Meanwhile us dumb fucks fight tooth and nail over single payer health care or a rise in the pension age.

The elites' biggest threat is dying of laughter.

[redpillage]

(11-09-2017 02:35 AM)Nordwand Wrote:  

Agree with this. A few weeks ago, with a television at work showing the latest act of cultural enrichment in the UK, a middle aged woman commented "I'm worried about white terrorism". These people really haven't got a clue.

Honestly at this point I am exhausted by all this shit. After literally tens of thousands of attacks on a local level and dozens of terrorists attack people worry about 'white terrorism'.

I say fuck it - let them all burn and enjoy the fruit of their beloved multiculturalism.