/mlpol/ - My Little Politics

>>153752
I'll admit, everything the left has been doing lately reeks of desperation: their tricks don't work anymore and they know it. Still, that's no excuse for us to get lazy or overconfident. We'll keep on fighting like we have until we can turn "winning" into "won".

↻
As the money runs out, utopia is not affordable. Everyone hunkers down (nationalism) and squabbles over what remains (war?). Economics controls the situation, not REEEEing on the internet or the streets. Economics will affect how people vote.

>>153756
You ever wonder if these cycles are just our human minds picking up patterns where there aren't any? I could argue that there hasn't been so much a cycle as just a balance of power that keeps leaning from one side to the other.

>>153765
So it's not that they're cycles, but rather oscillations as life tries to find its equilibrium, or rather, Harmony.

>>153765
>balance of power that keeps leaning from one side to the other.
That would be a cycle.

I doubt the "cycle" is mathematically perfect as my simple theory implies. An asteroid strike will certainly change the "cycle". But it is good enough to describe the near-term future, probably up to our deaths. And that is good enough.

I have been suggesting that the Right would keep rising for some time. A year or two ago no one would have taken me seriously, now… this thread exists.

Now I will go a bit further because being le edgy is fun. The Q "LARP" seems to be a NSA/MI population management operation (been active for 8 months now), coupled with Trump I will call the whole package Authoritarian Civic Nationalism. The Left Authoritarianism reach has done its usual gradual transformation to Right Authoritarianism, but interesting now expressed through a chan. Curious.

Technology seems to not cycle so far so it changes the expression.

We can test Martin Armstrong's theory in 2032.

>>153765
>>153767
Martin Armstrong would see the whole thing as a large collection cycles. Each then is destabilising the others keeping everything in flux.

But the more abstractly you look at a situation the more order occurs. No matter how much we REEEEE or not. The Earth orbit is pretty much the same. The Galaxy even more stable. It's interesting that the more you look into the fine details the cycle is lost in chaos, it only emerges at the broad overview. Or perhaps there are too many cycles in a microscopic view for us to plot them all?

>>153768
>>153769
>That would be a cycle.
Not necessarily.

While your graphs would suggest the existence of a cycle, I don't see much in the way of actual evidence that would confirm it. Looking at your graphs, I don't even see a relation between what they say, and what has been happening for the past 100 years. Perhaps you could share some empirical evidence, or some more detailed timelines of events and innovations that would confirm the existence of the cycle, but what you've shown so far it just seems like fluff to me: smoke and mirrors, our OCD human minds playing tricks with us.

>>153772
This is an old post from the past, it might answer your query and save me time typing out something new (and updated). It should show that the cycle is based on the human lifespan and the gyrations caused by contraception and war. Let me know if you have a specific query.

———

How to destroy any civilisation in 1 step.

When a problem occurs we look around for the immediate cause, we then blame the problem on that cause. This is a natural way of thinking but some problems have a cause which is significantly distant into the past and for this reason we fail to recognise it as the cause. This is even more true when in the modern information age we get real time information. What I want to discuss is how the West began destroying itself nearly 100 years ago, and it was not the Jews or immigration policies. These are only consequences of what the West did and I am going to try and prove that to you.

The first chart shows the history of US interest rates. I'll use this as a proxy for economic activity, the second chart has the US birth rate overlaid but offset by X years where a correlation seems to exist. There seems to be correlations at +10 years, +25 years and +34 years. If this correlation is also an explanation we should be able to explain it. I'll use the US birth rate as a proxy for the West in general.

At about the age of about 34 people get a home loan ( http://nationalmortgageprofessional.com/news/55433/zillow-average-first-time-homebuyer-33-years-age ) this would affect interests rates and economic activity. At the age of 25 a person is likely to have started in the workforce, contributing to and buying from the economy, the extra productivity rases interest rates. I am less certain about the age of 10, I specualate that this is when children require more sophisticated entertainment and education products. Perhaps parents have some answer to this?

What I hope this shows is that the effect of the baby rate has future impacts on the economy. Whilst we don't think, as individuals, that us having a child or not is very important to our culture or country, at scale it has a huge impact. This is probably not very surprising once you think about it. The bedrock of an economy is people existing to participate in it. For every child that does not exist about ~40-50 man-years of economy does not exist. (Assuming age 20/25-65/70 worklife.)

If any event occurs to reduce baby making, economic destruction begins to occur about 10 years later, is at maximum effect about 34 years latter and continues into the future non-stop. Knowing this we can now examine history and see how this plays out. I'll remind you that in the 24 hour news cycle age no one cares what happened yesterday (unless it pushes a narrative), and in 4chan no one cares about what happened an hour ago (unless it pushes a narrative) therefore no one cares at all about what happened a decade or more ago. So what I am sharing here is not going to be the typical description we know of history, even by normies or /pol/ perspectives.

The third image is US fertility rates and overlaid on it is the causes of the fertility decline. Since we have established that less economy, is caused by less babies, and now we can establish less babies is due to contraception, we can state more contraception equals less economy. Lets examine the 1920s. With the introduction of family planning and there being now no real opposition ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_control_movement_in_the_United_States ), baby making rates begin to plummet. This creates in society an excess of wealth because the economy had naturally evolved to include a higher rate of spending on raising children. When this money has no children to raise it gets used in other ways. We end up with the Roaring '20s and the stock market boom. You can see how such a small change in society (condoms) has enormous effects on its economics and culture. This richness of society allows all sorts of decadence to become affordable, but not only that, sex itself has no consequences. Sex itself no longer carries the risk of 20 years of raising a child. What a great time to be alive! How liberating (shoutout to Liberals). Does this not show that a liberal philosophy is correct? Well, no because in 1929 the stock market has no more of this excess cash, plus all the bank loans added on to it, to hold it in bubble territory. Any selling is met with no buyer who has not already bought in. The stock market crashes and all the wealth that was historically reserved to raise children evaporates into nothing. Now there is no children and no confidence in the economy resulting in the Great Depression.

One of the strange things about humanity is that when times are hard we have more children, and when times are easy we have less children. At first this seems illogical but when you examine the mindset of people in a third world country the answer becomes clear. Every adult has the concern about making sure their old age is secure. There are two ways to secure your old age; 1) money 2) children. If we have enough money (and that does not just mean your bank account, it could be a government pension, or a expensive house you can sell) you have less pressure to guarantee your future old age with family/children. A rich society has a tendency to favour money for old age security, and a poor society has no choice but to depend on children who will grow up to look after them. And the more desperate a person's situation is the more children they will have in the hopes that some survive into the future to look after them. This is why dysfunctional societies breed and functional societies do not breed. Contraception makes the 'not breeding' option even easier to achieve.

part 1/

The 1920s introduced family planning, that is the unimpeded distribution of condoms allow the rich West to destroy their future economy. This begins about 10 years after the introduction (as discussed above) and so in the 1930s we have the Great Depression. This desperate time creates a lot of unemployed men. These men are feeling “emaculated” they cannot provide for their families as they wish, their days are long, boring and depressing. One of the cheap ways for those men to feel masculine and uplifted and pass time, and achieve this at no cost with the energy they have from not working, is to have sex with their wife. This, coupled with condoms now being unaffordable or unobtainable stops the collapse in the birth rates as shown by the chart. Bad times = babies.

At the economic level everything is in a destroyed state, people are agitated all over the world, finger pointing is continuous, tempers are rising. When a government is experiencing threats from its population governments need to deflect blame to someone else. This deflection has to be someone who is not them and not the majority of the population (Shout out to Hillary Clinton and the “Russians”). The ideal scape-goat is someone over the border but it can be immigrants in the community also. But as you should realise by now it is at its core a birth rate problem caused by contraception and not by nations or races. It is true that these groups can add on to the problem, but they couldn't add on to the problem if the problem was not there to begin with. It is these stresses caused by contraception that causes the rise of international conflict and racism as everybody tries to deflect blame at the same time.

This takes us to World War II, and the blaming of the Jews, which I hope now you can see as misplaced and the massive chimp out as the world goes full retard …. all because of a condom. Seriously! This massive war needs massive amount of rubber for tyres, this makes condoms less available and the birth rate rises dramatically so that by the end of the war the birth rate is approaching pre-condom levels. But the West is so “smart” it has a plan to make sure, even more, that it can stop babies from being born! We go through the cold war, the rise of the military-industrial complex, government secrecy, and then in 1960 we get The Pill! The next saviour of Western civilisation from the scourge of raising children and securing its future! And so the birth rate plummets again, and 10 years later we have the OPEC oil crisis. But wait how can a lack of oil be such a big issue if the economy should be slowing down because of The Pill. To answer this we need to look at the effects of birth rates beyond 10 years.

The last of the high birth rates was the 1910s, this means those people became 25 around 1935 this explains the bottom of the Great Depression, as well, and the uptick in the economy and also the birth rate because condoms are still unavailable (condoms were made in Germany! Shoutout to Weimar Republic and hedonistic Berlin! Condoms = degeracy!) at 34 they are wanting to buy houses and have families. Because this is occurring during the Great Depression and the War there is a baby making recovery, and those children are a boom in the economy, meanwhile these 1910s babies are also still participating in the economy at a reasonable level in the 1970s because they have not retired yet. This double whammy economic uplift causes economic strain on the infrastructure and the result is OPEC can use the situation to blackmail the West.

These adult booms cause the rise of interest rates to counter inflation because of the rise of demand from so many workers/consumers in the system. Meanwhile The Pill is “solving” the problem by decimating the birth rates again. However the West has an additional trick up it's sleeve to make triply sure children don't get born. In 1970 we also add the right to abort for any reason. Ha ha now we can be rid of these stinking kids all together! And so the baby boom of the recent past is the last boost given to the future of Western civilisation. And as these people die out so does the West. Lets take a look at that.

Looking at the birth rate graph, lets use the year 1960 as the centre of the baby boom. Now lets add on a retirement age of 65 years old. Add them together and we get the year 2025. Since the rate of upcoming babies is very low, once these people leave the economy the economy collapses, its fundamental support is going to retire en mass. But that is not all, they don't simply leave, they become “gibmedats”, they want a pension. They don't vacate the economy (which is bad enough), they accelerate the consumption of the remaining parts of the wealth in the economy. This is the death blow given to an already sick animal. This is the West's near term future.

part 2/

This is why immigration is occurring. Someone has to pay for the retirees, someone has to pay taxes for the governments debts + interest. You can't protect a culture and a way of life which has decided to not breed AND afford to pay for old age people and interest payments. A Government's primary duty is the keep the economy afloat, preserving culture is necessarily secondary to financial collapse. Immigration is a symptom of the problem we face, not the cause.

The West is completely fucked, and we started this complete disaster in the 1920s, and in the 2020s we will (not) reap what we (did not) sew. Literally. The US and the West will collapse over the coming decades, the only choice we have is deciding which way we fall over but we will still fall over. We will be invaded one way or another, because nature abhors a vacuum, by war or by governments supporting it as policy. We can do this disaster with a WWII chimp out and still loose, or we can surrender to those who do breed peacefully. And remember it is dysfunctional societies that breed more, and functional societies that breed less.

I can go into more details if you have questions and I am very interested in having my hypothesis challenged. I like being wrong because it gives me the opportunity to be even more correct in the future.

I am making this post because I want anyone considering that harming others as a solution to understand that we did this to ourselves, it is not a conspiracy placed upon us by others. It is possible for others to kick us on the way down, just as we kick CNN on their way down. But just as the meme war won't be the primary cause of CNNs continuing failure, no other group is the primary cause of the West's failure. CNN shot itself in the foot, and so did the West.

Prepare for things to get worse.

part 3/3

So all of that above leads to the economic then political struggles which leads to the Right taking over and imposing hard solutions onto the population by the hard men.

>>153752
>California is breaking apart
If you're referring to the push to split it into three states, that's a Democrat gambit to regain control of DC. It is not the liberation of the great state of Jefferson. The proposed state borders place Democrat mega stronghold cities in control of each state and will grant an increase in the number of seats that the dems enjoy in DC.

>>153774
>>153775
>>153776
Thank you for your detailed explanation! And yes, I agree, a nation is built and sustained for its children and the increased socialization/degeneracy of the West is essentially its suicide. However, I wonder how this ties into Oswald Spengler's Decline of the West? Also, you say that blame on the Jews is merely a scapegoat for the white race's great folly, but I must ask: who supported and brought about central banking and contraception?

I believe it is worth looking at every alternative viewpoint. A book ought to be written that comprehensively outlines the West's decline.

>>153780
Temptation requires the tempter and the tempted to agree to participate together. I am still unsure what the situation is with the Jews. I don't know that one can cast a whole "race" as conspirators. I will say that I see no reason why some portion of a group of people might become very good at forseeing and exploiting situations that arise but I suspect they are benefiting by going along with the cycle, not causing it. You can't sell what no one is buying. Because this group operates at the front of the wave they are seen as making the wave.

I see this subset of Jews as being like Anarcho-Capitalists, if you are willing to buy degeneracy they are willing to sell it to you. Do we blame only one party in the transaction? Does Liberty guarantee the right to be degenerate?

When Berlin is flooded with condoms, and sex is a free-for-all, in the 1920s, is it the Jews fault for making pornography available to a waiting market? I don't know of Jews forcing Germans into degeneracy, the Germans were going willingly. Now it is understandable that Hitler is not going to blame his people for participating, and instead blame the seller. But I see this as more of a "we must blame someone, not the German government or German people, for the Great Depression and subsequent problems", it very similar to starting a war to unite a nation (Democrats: "Russia! Russia! Russia!"). I do understand there is a connection between Jews and Communism, and I do understand that Jewish religious texts look down on non-Jews. But I can't blame the Jews for the Great Depression or selling degeneracy that people are buying.

I think these easily visible things are like lions awaiting the animal to weaken. The weakening comes first then the lion pounces. Cause and effect are opposite to what most would think, in my view. The rot comes from within, not without. If you are healthy the disease can't get a foot hold.

>are we winning?
This still exists.

>>153785
I didn't mean to imply that we had won.

>>153780
>Oswald Spengler's Decline of the West?
I am not familiar with this but I can read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Decline_of_the_West It talks about 1000 year civilisations. Martin Armstrong talks about 309 year civilizations. (Pic1) The problem with all of this is that I suspect some of these cycles are more like fractals and other cycles can severely knock a cycle around too. So you can't have both an accurate and simple cycle description. You have to sacrifice one or the other.

Which brings me to choosing and focusing on ~100 years. That originated with Martin Armstrong's suggestion that people spend ~50 years being confident in government over private industry, then flipping. (Pic2) The Great Depression was a shock to confidence in the Stock Market that takes decades to go away, mostly through those that remember dying. Then the opposite occurs, gov debt becomes too great and they default, flipping people back to the markets. Within this are sub-cycles down to what MA thinks is a 8.6 year cycle, or business cycle.

There are a multitude of interacting cycles but the one that hurts an individual the most is the one that is a little longer than a human life. Because we will never remember what is coming next because the last time it happened was before we (and everyone else we might talk to) were born. Since our lives are about ~90 years, the 100 year cycle always blind-sides us. I also suspect that our life length might be the cause also, making it symbiotic. Alternatively it might be a fluke of how and when the contraceptions became available. I am not sure.

Evidence of this will be the constant amazement of the rising Right WIng because no one alive can remember such a thing. Which then leads to other problems. This rise "against" the remember odds will cause arrogance and ego and the Right is in danger of doing a Hitler all over again, including the death, destruction, demise and defeat.

Talking of cycles there is also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strauss%E2%80%93Howe_generational_theory which has a full revolution at 67-112 years.

MA focuses on averages which make nice geometric charts and he explains away major events not happening precisely on schedule by calling these "confidence" charts. Strauss–Howe focus on real world events and so see it as a little wobbly. Both are perspective on some central truth. And these fit too nice with a rotating political ideology wheel that I present.

>>153780
>>153787
Martin Armstrong has Rome civilization listed 3 times:
309.6 x 3 = 928.8, close to 1000 years.

More fun with charts:
Pic 1 - The green line is birthrate, the blue line is economic activity pulled back 35 years. This is because ~35 years old is the average age to buy a house. Since for most people this is the largest economic activity I use it as a proxy for a individuals total economic activity. It correlates roughly. We can see that the birthrate has flat-lined and so by correlation the economic activity of the future will also flat-line. We can spike it with immigration?

Pic 2 - Another way to look at civilization cycles is to look at who has the world reserve currency.

>>153784
Well, I have not read Culture of Critique and certainly not enough books to address this on an academic level, but it is fairly simple.

Only the simple-minded consider all of Jewry a hivemind or guilty on the same level. There is, nonetheless, a racial as well as cultural component that leads to "Jewish" behavior. After their meteoric rise and fall as a regional power in the 10th century B.C., Jews have been scattered and are a minority in their host countries. To survive as a people, they adapted traits which most favor such minorities. They are intelligent, hard-working, and smooth communicators, but most of all, they have a deepset hatred of outsiders, the goyim (obviously not universal, but generally true). They have always remained extremely collectivist within the context of their tribe as, justified or not, they view themselves as persecuted. These traits have enabled them to subsist as minorities.

However, it should be noted that they are also a component of certain political beliefs. Far from being a united enemy, there are two ideologies that are predominant in the Jewish community that are equally opposed to us. Far older of course is Zionism, which springs naturally from the concept of still being the "Chosen People," and which sanctions the subversion of nations to serve Israel. The other, far more recent (though I have seen evidence of "proto-marxists" existing since the 17th century) is Marxism and essentially left-wing ideology in general. Unlike Zionism, which is celebrated by conservative and orthodox Jews, Marxist derivatives are generally held by reformed and/or atheistic Jews. Although it has roots in Jewish thought (explaining the precedence of Jews as left-wing ideologues), it is not explicitly Jewish and therefore better at snatching up followers than mere "guilt for the Holocaust" and "support our greatest ally." These are the sorts of Jews who, rather than want an Israeli empire, want to support open borders and mass migration. As this will inevitably result in a global monoculture ruled by an itinerant elite, this is generally the ideology of financiers, media moguls, etc.

These two groups will occasionally snap at each other, as Israel's jingoistic attitude does not resonate with Jews opposed to the concept of the nation-state. However, they will closely ally if a greater threat emerges: that of a traditionalist white-identity movement, which by its nature is resistant to Jewish influence. Because of this, it is easy for white identitarians to conceive as Jews being a monolithic bloc intent on controlling the world, as that is what is presented in the face of danger.

There are, of course, exceptions. There are Jews who reject both narratives out of an ideological or ethical impetus. Such individuals include Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard, who, despite being not explicitly counter-semitic were sidelined by the academic establishment. Others, like Brother Nathaniel, openly discuss the threat that Jewry poses. Still other Jews join the alt-right or at least the alt-lite as they see the destruction of the West as a threat rather than a benefit. Out of personal or collective self-interest, however, they rarely bring bring up the JQ and so of course are considered "controlled op" and "infiltrators."

The number of right-wing Jews is scarce for a reason. They have to reject their cultural beliefs as harmful and embrace instead a white-centric traditionalism that is relatively alien. That is, they are joining a movement that generally despises them and sometimes wants them dead. They must become race-traitors, as vilified among their kind as SJWs are to us and "Uncle Toms" are to blacks. The difference is that race-treason is encouraged among whites by a clever academic and media network, but for Jews it works the opposite way. They must scale the rapids just to reach a pool that can never fully accept them. It's no wonder there are so few truly red-pilled Jews, though their existence alone exposes that the JQ exists.

>Jews are ancaps

Within this lies the supposition that libertarianism, by reducing the oversight of government, rejects any sort of social morality; that is, it's libertine. Conversely, it implies that an authoritarian government is necessary for morals to be upheld, and is generally directly correlated with public morality.

I disagree. There is a far better solution, one that acknowledges cultural and moral differences exist. Jews do not operate on the same moral platform that Christians do. This fact arose partially out of cultural evolution, but regardless it shows that the two groups are not compatible.

Also, while Jews may make money from peddling immoral content, they will intentionally lose money in order to push their agenda. This is "ideological capitalism." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_n88E99Hdk

The Great Depression was also at least partially a responsibility of the Federal Reserve. https://mises.org/library/great-depression

>Oswald Spengler

I mentioned him not because he is more scientifically accurate than Armstrong, but because he came up with the thought essentially first. Western societies are linearly-minded and so the thought that we are on a terminal decline was a new thought, though not entirely out-of-place after the jarring horror of the Great War. Cyclical ideas are now generally more accepted due to the cyclical nature of the markets, though cultural cycles are still far from mainstream.

I heavily recommend you watch Alternative Hypothesis if you do not already. He explains how racial attributes can play a role.

For an overarching "civilizational theory," it cannot be purely economic. Traditionalists argue cultural decline started in the 18th century with French liberals. To what extent did Jews play a role in this afterward? This must be examined.

>>153787
I don't think we can escape "88" entirely, as we are long past the stage where the establishment with its subversives will give up power voluntarily. Therefore, in order to prevent a "new establishment" from simply being a new face of the old, some revolution will be necessary.
There will be a "Day of the Rope," if only to send a message and keep subversives out for maybe a hundred years. There is no permanent solution, but a long-term solution requires a reappraisal of how we view power and how heritage factors into other aspects of life. I do not think political authoritarianism is beneficial at all in the long-term and is useful only to bring about a "crash and burn."

>>153785
this, jews belong in europe with the rest of us. tbh

>>153774
>>153775
>>153776
>>153777
It is all certainly interesting. It would have been a bit more useful to correctly overlap the birthrate and economic strength graphs, and I have to partially disagree with your assessment of the Great Depression and wholly disagree with your assessment of WWII, but it's an interesting concept to think over.

>>153816
Jews belong in ovens.

>>153819
I'd still breed the frown off that face tho.

>>153830
Turn the leaf horse into your housewife horsewife.

>>153792
>it is not explicitly Jewish and therefore better at snatching up followers than mere "guilt for the Holocaust" and "support our greatest ally."

It is descriptions like this that make me think of the situation being pulled by the host than push by the "guest". If Jews did not exist, would the Left disappear? No. The host is naturally attracted to degeneracy when a economic boom occurs. The classic example is a successful ancient Rome becomes a degenerate ancient Rome. If Jewish ideology provides the mechanism for degeneracy (a.k.a. fun) the host then naturally wants to accept it.

I view all of this as - when enough energy has been centralised we allow entropy to have its way for a while, then when we have to pull it back we struggle with remembering how and finding the discipline and tenacity. This is what the Fascism 101 infographic >>153777 represents.

>As this will inevitably result in a global monoculture ruled by an itinerant elite, this is generally the ideology of financiers, media moguls, etc.

This is where my AnCap idea comes from.

>>Jews are ancaps
>Within this lies the supposition that libertarianism, by reducing the oversight of government, rejects any sort of social morality; that is, it's libertine. Conversely, it implies that an authoritarian government is necessary for morals to be upheld, and is generally directly correlated with public morality.

I was not trying to reach so broadly, I was just suggesting that they are making business decisions without thought of medium and long term consequence. Anarcho- because of unplanned outcomes. But we can't paint everyone with the same brush, some might be planning long term consequences.

>Jews do not operate on the same moral platform that Christians do.
Christian "turn the other cheek" is very different to the other Semitic religions. It has advantages and disadvantages.

Thanks for the thoughts and links. I'll look further.

>>153817
Pic1 ? >>153790

It is difficult to show a close correlation because much banking/economic/accounting voodoo can be done to distort stats, but it is logical that the base of economic activity is person to person transactions. Less babies, less transactions ~20-60 years later.

>Billionaire globalist George Soros has lashed out at President Trump, accusing him of single-handedly destroying his plans for the world "he created."
…
>He added that since Trump won office, “everything that could go wrong, has gone wrong” for the New World Order agenda.
…
>In a recent report by the New York Times, it was revealed that Soros and Hillary Clinton paid women to accuse Donald Trump of rape. Since the report broke, Soros gobbled up a lion's share of the publication by buying $3 million worth of stocks in the NY Times.
…
>But lately, he has been faced with a slew of attacks from the likes of Roseanne Barr to Vladimir Putin claiming things such as him being a Nazi sympathizer and controlling the Democratic Party.

Eventually the successful go to far and the blow-back occurs.

…
>‘It makes it very difficult for me to speak effectively because it can be taken out of context and used against me,’ Soros stated. Soros is still in shock that Trump won the election, something he didn’t see happening. ‘Apparently, I was living in my own bubble,’ he said.
…

Success creates arrogance. Should I suggest the 100 year cycle to him? :P

https://archive.fo/vZWjn
http://www.neonnettle.com/news/4326-george-soros-trump-is-single-handedly-destroying-my-plan-for-this-world

Soros will be dead within 10 years. Then the wheel will turn more and 100 year ago successes/mistakes can be repeated.

>In the Balkans, a Chance to Stabilize Europe
>By George Soros and Alexander Soros

>It has taken almost 25 years to get an agreement between the governments in Athens and Skopje on what to call the entity once known as the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. It would be a mistake to dismiss this as a minor development — particularly now, when the unity of the trans-Atlantic alliance is at its lowest point since World War II and the unity of the European Union is under challenge in every national election.

Comment: The EU made a mistake… imagine if the public voting could effect who ran the EU. The EU shell could remain and its nature change to match the public consensus. WIthout that then the EU then becomes the enemy of rising nationalism as the stresses sink their teeth in.

…
>However, the United States and Europe are not the only players in the region. Russia has made it clear that it will interfere if its interests are threatened, especially when it comes to potential NATO membership. It has already done so, in a failed putsch in Montenegro in 2016. Turkey’s president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, is making his presence felt in every state, and China is now one of the largest investors in the region, with ambitious plans to make the Balkans the main entry point into Europe of its One Belt, One Road initiative.
…
https://archive.is/ZCYo4
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/18/opinion/northern-macedonia-rename-greece.html

I don’t know. The media has quadrupled down on this children separation narrative, and the scary thing is that it’s actually freaking working. A lot of the supporters and right leaning folks I know are being successfully pulled into hating Trump, even ones who voted for him. They are believing all of the lies now, and it’s really worrisome.

>>155262
Children are the most easily exploited political tool. Think of how much stupid legislation goes toward "think of the children!" Why is gun control always levered towards protecting kids?

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/civil-unrest/children-and-propagana/

On the plus side, the 14 words also exploit this natural human condition. We should quintuple down on how immigrants are a threat to our children.

>>155262
This might cheer you up.

https://archive.is/rL6z8

>>155297
I anticipate that Trump etc. has some bombs primed and ready for November. What happens today won't matter when they go off later.

>>156808
Holy shit… actual spam!!!

>>155262
Then it's up to you to redpill them and wake them up like I woke up the normies around me.

The normie friends I made to look normal snort and quietly laugh at nigger jokes now, thanks to me. I redpilled them all on the news, got them to cancel their netflix subscriptions, and taught them how to torrent like real men.

>>155262
I repeat, that's seven former SJW fags who used to watch Love Island and Netflix Trash, and now watch torrented anime. They're voting UKIP next chance they get, thanks to me redpilling them about a certain pug-owner named Count Dankula, a certain Tommy Robinson going to jail and getting a death sentence for trying to expose pedophiles. I also got them hooked on edgy memes on the meme subreddits, then I told them about Article 13.