Softpanorama

May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Contents Bulletin Scripting in shell and Perl Network troubleshooting History Humor

Divide and conquer strategy

News Neocolonialism as financial imperialism Recommended Links IMF as the key institution for neoliberal debt enslavement The Grand Chessboard Greece debt enslavement Ukraine debt enslavement
American Exceptionalism Media-Military-Industrial Complex Mayberry Machiavellians Neo Trotskyism aka Neoconservatism "Fight with Corruption" as a smoke screen for neoliberal penetration into host countries Developing Countries Hit Hardest by Brain Drain Predator state
The Iron Law of Oligarchy Elite Theory Two Party System as polyarchy Economics of Energy   Super Imperialism New American Militarism
Neoliberalism  Disaster capitalism Predator state  Inside "democracy promotion" hypocrisy fair Right to protect Financial Sector Induced Systemic Instability Casino Capitalism
Neoliberal Brainwashing -- Journalism in the Service of the Powerful Few In Foreign Events Coverage The Guardian Presstitutes Slip Beyond the Reach of Embarrassment Political skeptic John Kenneth Galbraith Financial Humor Humor Etc

In politics and sociology, divide and conquer is gaining and maintaining power by breaking up larger concentrations of power into pieces that individually have less power than the one implementing the strategy. The concept refers to a strategy that breaks up existing power structures and prevents smaller power groups from linking up.

Traiano Boccalini cites "divide et impera" in La bilancia politica, 1,136 and 2,225 as a common principle in politics. The use of this technique is meant to empower the sovereign to control subjects, populations, or factions of different interests, who collectively might be able to oppose his rule.

Machiavelli identifies a similar application to military strategy, advising in Book VI of The Art of War[1] (Dell'arte della guerra),[2] that a Captain should endeavor with every art to divide the forces of the enemy, either by making him suspicious of his men in whom he trusted, or by giving him cause that he has to separate his forces, and, because of this, become weaker.

The maxim divide et impera has been attributed to Philip II of Macedon, and together with the maxim divide ut regnes were utilised by the Roman ruler Caesar and the French emperor Napoleon.

The strategy, but not the phrase, applies in many ancient cases: the example of Gabinius exists, parting the Jewish nation into five conventions, reported by Flavius Josephus in Book I, 169-170 of The Wars of the Jews (De bello Judaico).[3] Strabo also reports in Geography, 8.7.3[4] that the Achaean League was gradually dissolved under the Roman possession of the whole of Macedonia, owing to them not dealing with the several states in the same way, but wishing to preserve some and to destroy others.

The strategy of division and rule has been attributed to sovereigns ranging from Louis XI to the Habsburgs. Edward Coke denounces it in Chapter I of the Fourth Part of the Institutes, reporting that when it was demanded by the Lords and Commons what might be a principal motive for them to have good success in Parliament, it was answered: "Eritis insuperabiles, si fueritis inseparabiles. Explosum est illud diverbium: Divide, & impera, cum radix & vertex imperii in obedientium consensus rata sunt." [You would be insuperable if you were inseparable. This proverb, Divide and rule, has been rejected, since the root and the summit of authority are confirmed by the consent of the subjects.] On the other hand, in a minor variation, Sir Francis Bacon wrote the phrase "separa et impera" in a letter to James I of 15 February 1615. James Madison made this recommendation in a letter to Thomas Jefferson of 24 October 1787,[5] which summarized the thesis of The Federalist #10:[6] "Divide et impera, the reprobated axiom of tyranny, is under certain (some) qualifications, the only policy, by which a republic can be administered on just principles."

In Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch by Immanuel Kant (1795), Appendix one, Divide et impera is the third of three political maxims, the others being Fac et excusa (Act now, and make excuses later) and Si fecisti, nega (when you commit a crime, deny it).[7]

Elements of this technique involve:

Historically, this strategy was used in many different ways by empires seeking to expand their territories.

The concept is also mentioned as a strategy for market action in economics to get the most out of the players in a competitive market.

Contents

[hide]

In the workplace[edit]

Main article: Psychopathy in the workplace

Clive R. Boddy found that "divide and conquer" was a common strategy by corporate psychopaths used as a smokescreen to help consolidate and advance their grip on power in the corporate hierarchy.[8]

Historical examples[edit]

Africa[edit]

The divide and conquer strategy was used by foreign countries in Africa during the colonial and post-colonial period.

Asia[edit]

Europe[edit]

Indian subcontinent[edit]

The strategy of "Divide and Rule" was employed by most imperial powers in Indian subcontinent. The British and French backed various Indian states in conflicts between each other, both as a means of undermining each other's influence and consolidating their authority.

Middle East[edit]

Mexico[edit]

See also[edit]

References

  1. ^ http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au
  2. ^ http://www.intratext.com
  3. ^ "Flavius Josephus, The Wars of the Jews, Book I, section 159". Perseus.tufts.edu. Retrieved 2011-08-27.
  4. ^ "Strabo, Geography, Book 8, chapter 7, section 1". Perseus.tufts.edu. Retrieved 2011-08-27.
  5. ^ "Constitutional Government: James Madison to Thomas Jefferson". Press-pubs.uchicago.edu. Retrieved 2011-08-27.
  6. ^ http://www.constitution.org
  7. ^ "Immanuel Kant: Perpetual Peace: Appendix I". Constitution.org. Retrieved 2011-08-27.
  8. ^ Boddy, C. R. Corporate Psychopaths: Organizational Destroyers (2011)
  9. ^ www.historyworld.net
  10. ^ BUELL, PAUL D. (1979). "SINO-KHITAN ADMINISTRATION IN MONGOL BUKHARA". Journal of Asian History. Vol. 13 (No. 2). Harrassowitz Verlag. pp. 137–8. JSTOR 41930343.
  11. ^ "France: The Roman conquest". Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved April 6, 2015. Because of chronic internal rivalries, Gallic resistance was easily broken, though Vercingetorix's Great Rebellion of 52 bce had notable successes.
  12. ^ "Julius Caesar: The first triumvirate and the conquest of Gaul". Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved February 15, 2015. Indeed, the Gallic cavalry was probably superior to the Roman, horseman for horseman. Rome's military superiority lay in its mastery of strategy, tactics, discipline, and military engineering. In Gaul, Rome also had the advantage of being able to deal separately with dozens of relatively small, independent, and uncooperative states. Caesar conquered these piecemeal, and the concerted attempt made by a number of them in 52 bce to shake off the Roman yoke came too late.

Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

[Oct 11, 2017] The corporate state embraced identity politics

Notable quotes:
"... There is a big difference between shills for corporate capitalism and imperialism, like Corey Booker and Van Jones, and true radicals like Glen Ford and Ajamu Baraka. The corporate state carefully selects and promotes women, or people of color, to be masks for its cruelty and exploitation. ..."
"... The feminist movement is a perfect example of this. The old feminism, which I admire, the Andrea Dworkin kind of feminism, was about empowering oppressed women. This form of feminism did not try to justify prostitution as sex work. It knew that it is just as wrong to abuse a woman in a sweatshop as it is in the sex trade. The new form of feminism is an example of the poison of neoliberalism. It is about having a woman CEO or woman president, who will, like Hillary Clinton, serve the systems of oppression. It posits that prostitution is about choice. What woman, given a stable income and security, would choose to be raped for a living? Identity politics is anti-politics. ..."
Oct 11, 2017 | www.unz.com

DN: What about the impact that you've seen of identity politics in America?

CH: Well, identity politics defines the immaturity of the left. The corporate state embraced identity politics. We saw where identity politics got us with Barack Obama, which is worse than nowhere. He was, as Cornel West said, a black mascot for Wall Street, and now he is going around to collect his fees for selling us out.

My favorite kind of anecdotal story about identity politics: Cornel West and I, along with others, led a march of homeless people on the Democratic National Convention session in Philadelphia. There was an event that night. It was packed with hundreds of people, mostly angry Bernie Sanders supporters. I had been asked to come speak. And in the back room, there was a group of younger activists, one who said, "We're not letting the white guy go first." Then he got up and gave a speech about how everybody now had to vote for Hillary Clinton. That's kind of where identity politics gets you. There is a big difference between shills for corporate capitalism and imperialism, like Corey Booker and Van Jones, and true radicals like Glen Ford and Ajamu Baraka. The corporate state carefully selects and promotes women, or people of color, to be masks for its cruelty and exploitation.

It is extremely important, obviously, that those voices are heard, but not those voices that have sold out to the power elite. The feminist movement is a perfect example of this. The old feminism, which I admire, the Andrea Dworkin kind of feminism, was about empowering oppressed women. This form of feminism did not try to justify prostitution as sex work. It knew that it is just as wrong to abuse a woman in a sweatshop as it is in the sex trade. The new form of feminism is an example of the poison of neoliberalism. It is about having a woman CEO or woman president, who will, like Hillary Clinton, serve the systems of oppression. It posits that prostitution is about choice. What woman, given a stable income and security, would choose to be raped for a living? Identity politics is anti-politics.

[Sep 17, 2017] The best technique of obtaining soundbytes and posturing for neoliberal elite is based on so-called wedge issues by Piotr Berman

Notable quotes:
"... Donald Trump used alt-right messaging to get into the White House, but he and his third-rate staff haven't the slightest clue of what gave rise to the deplorables in the first place and how to address the root despair of the western working class ..."
"... And all authorities suggest to exploit the despair with soundbites and posturing. Granted, this is a platitude, but how to obtain compelling soundbites and posturing? I think that the best technique is based on so-called wedge issues. ..."
"... A good wedge issue should raise passions on "both sides" but not so much in the "center", mostly clueless undecided voters. ..."
"... Calibrate your position so it is a good scrap of meat for your "base" while it drives the adversaries to conniptions, the conniptions provide talking points and together, drive the clueless in your direction. Wash, repeat. ..."
www.moonofalabama.org
Piotr Berman | May 18, 2017 10:04:50 PM | 77
"Donald Trump used alt-right messaging to get into the White House, but he and his third-rate staff haven't the slightest clue of what gave rise to the deplorables in the first place and how to address the root despair of the western working class." VietnamVet

I do not know how highly rated the staff was, but it was sufficiently high. If the opponent has fourth-rate staff, it would be wasteful to use anything better than third-rate. Figuring what gave rise to the deplorable is a wasted effort, sociologist differ, and in politics the "root causes" matter only a little.

And all authorities suggest to exploit the despair with soundbites and posturing. Granted, this is a platitude, but how to obtain compelling soundbites and posturing? I think that the best technique is based on so-called wedge issues.

A good wedge issue should raise passions on "both sides" but not so much in the "center", mostly clueless undecided voters.

Calibrate your position so it is a good scrap of meat for your "base" while it drives the adversaries to conniptions, the conniptions provide talking points and together, drive the clueless in your direction. Wash, repeat.

[Sep 17, 2017] Joy Reids Politics of Tribalism and Punching Sideways

Sep 13, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

(Never mind that if Thomas Frank is correct, and the Democrats are the party of the professional classes, the Democrats cannot possibly be the party of "marginalized" people.) Being the sort of person I am, my first thought was to ask myself what the heck Reid could mean by "tribe," and how a "tribe" can act as a political entity.[1] Naturally, I looked to the Internet and did a cursory search; and it turns out that, at least at the scholarly level, the very notion of "tribe" is both contested and a product of colonialism. David Wiley, Department of Sociology and African Studies, Michigan State University, 2013

Tribe, a concept that has endeared itself to Western scholars, journalists, and the public for a century, is primarily a means to reduce for readers the complexity of the non-Western societies of Africa, Asia, Latin America and the American plains. It is no accident that the contemporary uses of the term tribe were developed during the 19th-century rise of evolutionary and racist theories to designate alien non-white peoples as inferior or less civilized and as having not yet evolved from a simpler, primal state. The uses and definitions of 'tribe' in the sociological and anthropological literature are varied and conflicting. Some authors appear to define tribe as common language, others as common culture, some as ancestral lineages, and others as common government or rulers. As anthropologist Michael Olen notes, "The term tribe has never satisfied anthropologists, because of its many uses and connotations. Societies that are classified as tribal seem to be very diverse in their organization, having little in common." Morton H. Fried and this author contend that "the term is so ambiguous and confusing that it should be abandoned by social scientists."

Even more striking is the invention of ethnic (labeled tribal) identities and their varied and plastic salience across the African continent. In some cases, "tribal identifies" have been invented in order to unite colonial and post-colonial clerical workers or other occupational and social groups to serve the interests of the members even though they were not bound together by language or lineage.

In the United States, where similar derogatory language of tribe has been used to characterize and stereotype Native American or First Nations peoples, the identity has been reified in federal legislation that requires "tribes," formerly under the Bureau of Indian Affairs, to accept that formal tribal identification in order to access the hunting, fishing, farming, and casino rights of reservations. Almost humorously, the Menominee peoples of Wisconsin decided to decline that nomenclature because many members lived in Milwaukee and other non-reservation sites; however, they then learned they must reverse that vote and re-declare themselves as "a tribe" in order to regain their reservation rights.

So, from the 30,000 foot level, it seems unlikely that what scholars mean (or do not mean) by "tribe" is the same as what Reid means, simply because there is no coherent meaning to be had.[2] My second thought was to try to fit "tribe" into the framework of identity politics, where tribes would be identities, or possibly bundles of allied[3] identities. Here's a handy chart showing the various ways that identity can be conceptualized, from Jessica A. Clarke*, "Identity and Form," California Law Review , 2015:

(Clarke gives definitions of ascriptive, elective, and formal identity -- for Adolph Reed on ascriptive identity, see here -- but I think the definitions are clear enough for our purposes from the examples in the table.) However, if we look back to Reid's quote, we see that she conflates ascriptive identity ("black or brown") with elective identity ("the sort of Pabst Blue Ribbon voter, the kind of Coors Lite-drinking voter")[4], and also conflates both of those with formal identity (if one's ethnicity be defined by one's own citizenship papers, or those of one's parents, or a changed surname; one thinks of Asian cultures putting the family name last in American culture, for example). So there is no coherence to be found here, either.

Let's return then to Reid's words, and look to her operational definition:

which party goes out and find more people who are like them

It's not clear to me whether Reid conceptualize parties as tribes, or as meta-tribes of tribes bundled together; I'm guessing the latter. Here is an example of Reid's conceptualizations ("like" each other) in action. From Teen Vogue , "Amandla Stenberg and Janelle Monáe Open Up About Racism and Where They Were During the Election" (2017). Somewhat too much of this, but the build-up is important:

AMANDLA STENBERG: Janelle frigging Monáe!?

JANELLE MONÁE: Hi, sweetie. You know I love, love, love you. First: pronouns! I want to make sure that I'm being respectful of how I'm referring to you. I know that the way we view ourselves and how we want to be addressed can change depending on where we are in life.

AS: I love that you asked me! Thank you. I have felt at times that she/her pronouns weren't entirely fitting, but I've never felt uncomfortable with them. It's more important for me to open up that conversation around pronouns and how gender itself is a construct that doesn't make much sense in our society.

JM: Got it. I remember seeing you for the first time in Colombiana, and then, like many people, I was drawn to your character in The Hunger Games as Rue. I'm a huge sci-fi nerd, so just seeing this little black girl in a dystopian world being a hero for an oppressed community, I was intrigued! The way you embodied this character felt like you were mature enough to understand how important she was to the movie but also how important the Rues all over the world are to our society.

AS: That's one of the best compliments that I've received! I remember we saw each other at the Tyler, the Creator show; we took a picture with Solange. You were wearing a jacket that said "black girl magic" on it, and I flipped out.

JM: Me, too! I was like, I am right between you and Solange, two people who are the epitome of black girl magic! I saw you later on, and you had just shot Everything, Everything, which, by the way, you are incredible in. The original story was written by a black woman [NicolaYoon], and your director [Stella Meghie] is also a black woman. What was going through your mind as you were considering the role?

AS: I kind of wrote it off initially because I figured it was one of those instances where I was receiving a script for a YA romance project that was intended for a white actress. I thought maybe they'd float the idea of casting it in a more diverse manner but that ultimately it wouldn't end up going that direction, because that's happened to me a lot. Then I realized that this project was based on a book written by a black woman and that the casting was intentionally diverse. I'd never seen a story like this made for an interracial couple. I'm not someone who generally has a pop or mainstream sensibility, but I see the incredible power of infiltrating these larger movies that show a lot of people who we are and how diverse and beautiful our community is. I thought it would be really powerful to see a black girl [lead] character like Maddy who is joyous and creative and dimensional specifically marketed to teenagers and young adults. We don't always get to see black women carrying that energy. That's one of the reasons why I respect and love you so much!because I feel like you perpetuate such whimsy and joy!

JM: Aw! Well, whenever I see you doing your thing, I feel like we're from the same tribe because I take a similar approach when I'm choosing projects. With the roles of Teresa in Moonlight and Ms. Mary Jackson in Hidden Figures , they're two women of color from totally different backgrounds and eras!from the hood to NASA, these black women were the backbones of their communities. I thought it was so important to let the rest of the world know that we're not monolithic. And with Hidden Figures in particular, I was so proud to be a part of exposing that if it were not for these women, we would not have gone to space. That's American history! Black history is part of American history, and it should be treated as such.

(Note in passing that I loathe the phrase "open up," which I define as "carefully engineered for a celebrity by public relations professionals." ) Of course, both actors are -- and rightly -- proud of their work, but note the carefully calibrated ways they establish that they are (as Joy Reid says) "like" each other. Oh, and do note the caption: "Miu Miu dress, price upon request." Class snuck in there, didn't it? In fact, we might go so far as to formalize Reid's definition of "tribe" as follows:

Tribes are people who are "like" each other when class is not taken into account

With that, let's take an alternative approach to conceptualizing tribes and tribalism, one that incorporates class. From former Arab Spring activist Iyad El-Baghdadi , I present the following charts, taken from the Twittter . (I'll present each chart, then comment briefly on it.) There are five:

Figure 1: Tribal Divisions

Comment: I'm taking El-Baghdadi's "ethnic affiliation," as a proxy for Reid's "tribe"; the verticality is clearly the same.)

Figure 2: Class Divisions

Comment: El-Baghdadi's representation of class divisions is fine as a visual shorthand, but I don't think it's an accurate representation. I picture the class structure of the United States not as a "normal distribution" with a fat "middle class" (I don't even accept "middle class" as a category) but as a power curve with a very few people at the head of the curve ( the "1%," more like the 0.01% ), followed by a steep shoulder of the 10% (white collar professionals, from Thomas Frank's Listen, Liberal ), and trailed by a long tail of wage workers (and unwaged workers, as I suppose we might call the disemployed, unpaid caregivers, System D people like loosie-selling Eric Garner, and so on). If you want to find who hasn't had a raise in forty years, look to the long tail, which I would call l "working class," rather than "lower class."

Figure 3: Privilege Divisions

Comment: Taking once again El-Baghdadi's "ethnic affiliation," as a proxy for Reid's "tribe," and conceptualizing WASPs as a tribe, it's clear to me, if I look at my own history, that I'm more likely ti have good luck than some other tribes. I'm more likely to have intergenerational wealth in the form of a house, or even financial assets, more likely to be highly educated, more likely to have the markers and locutions that enable me to interact successfully with bureaucratic functionaries, etc. I didn't earn any of those advantages; I would have had to have chosen to be born to different parents to avoid them. I think we can agree that if we were looking for an operational definition of justice, this wouldn't be it.

Figure 4: Punching Sideways

Comment: Classically, we have owners following Gould's maxim by bringing in (mostly black) scabs to break the Homestead Strike in 1892, with a resulting "tribal" conflict -- although those scabs might protest -- and rightly -- that (a) they were only trying to provide for their families and (b) that the Jim Crow system had denied them the "good jobs" that in justice would have given them (leaving aside the question of who implemented Jim Crow, and for what material benefits). In modern times we have "tribes" (white, black, Asian, at the least) battling on the field of "affirmative action" having weaponized their ascriptive identities. Here again, representatives of some "tribes" would protest -- and rightly -- that systems like "legacy admissions" give some "tribes" unjust advantage over others, but the hidden assumption is one of resource constraint; given a pie of fixed size, if Tribe A is to have more, Tribe B must have less. Note that programs like "tuition-free college" tend to eliminate the resource constraint, but are "politically feasible" only if Tribes A and B solve their collective action problem, which is unlikely to be done based on tribalism.

Figure 5: Punching Up

Comment: This diagram implies that the only "legitimate" form of seeking justice is vertical, "punching up." This eliminates clear cases where justice is needed within and not between classes, like auto collisions, for example, or the household division of labor. More centrally, the nice thing about thinking vertically is that it eliminates obvious absurdities like "Justice for black people means making the CEO of a major bank black (ignoring the injustices perpetrated using class-based tools disproportionately against black people in, say, the foreclosure crisis, where a generation's-worth of black household wealth was wiped out under America's first black President). Or obvious absurdities where justice is conceived of as a woman, instead of a man, using the power of office to kill thousands of black and brown people, many of them women, to further America's imperial mission.

* * *

Concluding a discussion on politics and power that has barely begun -- and is of great importance if you believe, as I do, that we're on the midst of and ongoing and highly volatile legitimacy crisis that involves the break-up and/or realignment of both major parties -- it seems to me that El-Baghdadi visual representation, which fits tribalism into a class-driven framework, is both analytically coherent (as Reid's usage of "tribe" is not) and points to a way forward from our current political arrangements (as Reid's strategy of bundling "punching sideways" tribes into parties while ignoring class does not). More to come .

NOTES

[Sep 01, 2017] South Koreas Greatest Fear (and It Isnt a North Korean Invasion)

Sep 01, 2017 | nationalinterest.org
spending nearly $13.7 billion. Just two years ago, it seemed that Seoul and Beijing were embarking on a honeymoon phase when President Park Geun-hye attended a military parade in Tiananmen Square commemorating the end of World War II!the only U.S. ally to do so.

Then THAAD happened.

In July 2016, Seoul and Washington announced their decision to deploy the anti-missile system. China opposed the deployment, saying it undermined China's security and would destabilize the region because its radars could be used by the United States to track China's missile activities.

China wanted to "teach South Korea a lesson" for the effrontery of the THAAD deployment. Shortly after the announcement, Beijing banned the airing of Korean TV shows, films, and K-pop acts in China. After it was revealed that Lotte Group!a South Korean conglomerate operating 112 stores in mainland China!once owned the land THAAD would be based on, Chinese state media called for a nationwide boycott of the company. By March 2017, nearly half of Lotte's stores on the mainland were shutdown , due to vague "safety violations." That same month, Beijing banned its travel agencies from selling trips to Korea, resulting in a 66 percent decrease in Chinese visitors from last year. Shortly after President Moon Jae-in was elected to the Blue House in May 2017, he announced the suspension of further THAAD deployments until further review.

Many South Koreans told me they expected blowback from the decision to deploy THAAD, but the swiftness and intensity of Beijing's retaliation caught them off guard. Beijing's response to THAAD, they said, "opened our [South Korean] eyes to China's true colors ." Simply put, they believed Beijing could not be relied on to consider South Korea's interests if China's interests were on the line. This disillusionment is fanning mistrust and has damaged China's image in South Korea. A March 2017 Asan Institute poll found that, for the first time ever , Koreans had a more favorable view of Japan than of China. This was a shocking finding; Japan has consistently been South Koreans' least favorite country after North Korea.

In spite of growing mistrust, South Koreans recognize the crucial role Beijing plays in reining in Pyongyang. Many interlocutors said they believed, in spite of THAAD, that Chinese officials wanted to maintain good relations with South Korea!albeit on China's terms.

[Aug 27, 2017] Manipulated minorities represent a major danger for democratic states>

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... the reason why the US always support foreign minorities to subvert states and use domestic minorities to suppress the majority US population is because minorities are very easy to manipulate and because minorities present no threat to the real rulers of the AngloZionist Empire ..."
"... To distill it to an aphorism, "A million guys with one buck, are no match for one guy with a million bucks." ..."
"... Another point: The poorer people are, the more vulnerable they are to identity politics. ..."
"... What do all races, genders, nationalities and creeds have in common? An overwhelming majority of them are working class. That's why I am white and Nationalist but not a White Nationalist. The working class wants work and wages. The ruling class gives us war and welfare. Solidarity is the only effective defense against concentrated wealth. Absent solidarity the working class is a one legged man in an ass kicking contest. Witness the American prole. Simultaneously under the lash and at each others throats. ..."
"... Some minorities are more equal than others. The Deep State, for example. ..."
"... It's impossible to have a functional political system when the political parties themselves are allowed to decide what issues voters get to vote on, and can racially divide the electorate by providing policy packages which play to voter weaknesses. This results in absurd results like blacks in the US voting for mass unskilled immigration via the Democrats, and poor American whites voting for increased defense spending and financial liberalisation via the Republicans. ..."
Aug 27, 2017 | www.unz.com

My thesis is very simple: the reason why the US always support foreign minorities to subvert states and use domestic minorities to suppress the majority US population is because minorities are very easy to manipulate and because minorities present no threat to the real rulers of the AngloZionist Empire . That's all there is to it.

I think that minorities often, but not always, act and perceive things in a way very different from the way majority groups do. Here is what I have observed:

Let's first look at minorities inside the US:

They are typically far more aware of their minority identity/status than the majority. That is to say that if the majority is of skin color A and the minority of skin color B, the minority will be much more acutely aware of its skin color. They are typically much more driven and active then the majority. This is probably due to their more acute perception of being a minority. They are only concerned with single-issue politics , that single-issue being, of course, their minority status. Since minorities are often unhappy with their minority-status, they are also often resentful of the majority . Since minorities are mostly preoccupied by their minority-status linked issue, they rarely pay attention to the 'bigger picture' and that, in turn, means that the political agenda of the minorities typically does not threaten the powers that be . Minorities often have a deep-seated inferiority complex towards the putatively more successful majority. Minorities often seek to identify other minorities with which they can ally themselves against the majority.

To this list of characteristics, I would add one which is unique to foreign minorities, minorities outside the US: since they have no/very little prospects of prevailing against the majority, these minorities are very willing to ally themselves with the AngloZionist Empire and that, in turn, often makes them depended on the AngloZionist Empire, often even for their physical survival.

The above are, of course, very general characterizations. Not all minorities display all of these characteristics and many display only a few of them. But regardless of the degree to which any single minority fits this list of characteristics, what is obvious is that minorities are extremely easy to manipulate and that they present no credible (full-spectrum) threat to the Empire.

The US Democratic Party is the perfect example of a party which heavily relies on minority manipulation to maximize its power. While the Republican Party is by and large the party of the White, Anglo, Christian and wealthy voters, the Democrats try to cater to Blacks, women, Leftists, homosexuals, immigrants, retirees, and all others who feel like they are not getting their fair share of the proverbial pie. Needless to say, in reality there is only one party in the US, you can call the the Uniparty, the Republicracts or the Demolicans, but in reality both wings of the Big Money party stand for exactly the same things. What I am looking at here is not at some supposed real differences, but the way the parties present themselves. It is the combined action of these two fundamentally identical parties which guarantees the status quo in US politics which I like to sum up as "more of the same, only worse".

I would like to mention an important corollary of my thesis that minorities are typically more driven than the majority. If we accept that minorities are typically much more driven than most of the population, then we also immediately can see why their influence over society is often out of proportion with the numerical demographical "weight". This has nothing to do with these minorities being more intelligent or more creative and everything to do with them willing to being spend much more time and efforts towards their objectives than most people.

So we have easy to manipulate, small groups, whose agenda does not threaten the 1% (really, much less!), who like to gang up with other similar minorities against the majority. Getting scared yet? It gets worse.

Western 'democracies' are mostly democracies only in name. In most of them instead of "one man one vote" we see "one dollar one vote" meaning that big money decides, not "the people". Those in real power have immense financial resources which they cynically use to boost the already totally disproportional power of the various minorities. Now this is really scary:

Easy to manipulate, small groups, highly driven, whose agenda does not threaten the ruling plutocracy, who like to gang up with other similar minorities against the majority and whose influence is vastly increased by immense sums of money invested in them by the plutocracy. How is that for a threat to real people power, to the ideals of democracy?!

The frightening truth is that the combination of minorities and big money can easily hijack a supposedly 'democratic' country and subjugate the majority of its population to the "rule of the few over the many".

Once we look this reality in the face we should also become aware of a very rarely mentioned fact: while we are taught that democracies should uphold the right of the minorities, the opposite is true: real democracies should strive to protect majorities against the abuse of power from minorities!

I know, I have just committed a long list of grievous thoughtcrimes!

At those who might be angry at me, I will reply with a single sentence: please name me a western country where the views of the majority of its people are truly represented in the policies of their governments? And if you fail to come up with a good example, then I need to ask you if the majority is clearly not in power, then who is?

I submit that the plutocratic elites which govern the West have played a very simple trick on us all: they managed to focus our attention on the many cases in history when minorities were oppressed by majorities but completely obfuscated the numerous cases whereminorities oppressed majorities.

Speaking of oppression: minorities are far more likely to benefit and, therefore, use violence than the majority simply because their worldview often centers on deeply-held resentments. To put it differently, minorities are much more prone to settling scores for past wrongs (whether real or imagined) than a majority which typically does not even think in minority versus majority categories .

Not that majorities are always benign or kind towards minorities, not at all, humans being pretty much the same everywhere, but by the fact that they are less driven, less resentful and, I would argue, even less aware of their "majority status" they are less likely to act on such categories.

Foreign minorities play a crucial role in US foreign policy. Since time immemorial rulers have been acutely aware of the " divide et impera " rule, there is nothing new here. But the US has become the uncontested leader in the art of using national minorities to create strife and overthrow a disobedient regime. The AngloZionist war against the Serbian nation is the perfect example of how this is done: the US supported any minority against the Serbs, even groups that the US classified as terrorists, as long as this was against the Serbs. And, besides being Orthodox Slavs and traditional allies of Russia, what was the real 'crime' of the Serbs? Being the majority of course! The Serbs had no need of the AngloZionists to prevail against the various ethnic (Croats) and religious (Muslims) minorities they lived with. That made the Serbs useless to the Empire. But now that the US has created a fiction of an independent Kosovo, the Kosovo Albanians put up a statue of Bill Clinton in Prishtina and, more relevantly, allowed the Empire to build the Camp Bondsteel mega-base in the middle of their nasty little statelet, right on the land of the Serbian population that was ethnically cleansed during the Kosovo war. US democracy building at its best indeed

The same goes for Russia (and, the Soviet Union) where the US went as far as to support the right of self-determination for non-existing "captive nations" such as "Idel-Ural" and "Cossakia" . I would even argue that the Empire has created several nation ex nihilo (What in the world is a "Belarussian"?!).

I am fully aware that in the typical TV watching westerner any discussion of minorities focusing on their negative potential immediately elicits visions of hammers and sickles, smoking crematoria chimneys, chain gangs, lynchmobs, etc. This is basic and primitive conditioning. Carefully engineered events such as the recent riots in Charlottesville only further reinforce this type of mass conditioning. This is very deliberate and, I would add, very effective. As a result, any criticism, even just perceived criticism, of a minority immediately triggers outraged protests and frantic virtue-signaling (not me! look how good I am!!).

Of course, carefully using minorities is just one of the tactics used by the ruling plutocracy. Another of their favorite tricks is to created conflicts out of nothing or ridiculously bloat the visibility of an altogether minor topic (example: homo-marriages). The main rule remains the same though: create tensions, conflicts, chaos, subvert the current order (whatever that specific order might be), basically have the serfs fight each other while we rule .

In Switzerland an often used expression to describe "the people" is "the sovereign". This is a very accurate description of the status of the people in a real democracy: they are "sovereign" in the sense that nobody rules over them. In that sense, the issue in the United States is one of sovereignty: as of today, the real sovereign of the US are the corporations, the deep state, the Neocons, the plutocracy, the financiers, the Israel Lobby – you name it, anybody BUT the people.

In that system of oppression, minorities play a crucial role, even if they are totally unaware of this and even if, at the end of the day, they don't benefit from it. Their perception or their lack of achievements in no way diminishes the role that they play in the western pseudo-democracies.

How do with deal with this threat?

I think that the solution lies with the minorities themselves: they need to be educated about the techniques which are used to manipulate them, and they need to be convinced that their minority status does not, in reality, oppose them to the majority and that both the majority and the minorities have a common interest in together standing against those who seek to rule over them all. Striving to remain faithful to my "Putin fanboy" reputation, I will say that I believe that Russia under Putin is doing exactly the right thing by giving the numerous Russian minorities a stake in the future of the Russian state and by convincing the minorities that their interests and the interest of the majority of the people are fundamentally the same: being a minority does not have to mean being in opposition to the majority. It is a truism that minorities need to be fully integrated into the fabric of society and yet this is rarely practiced in the real world. This is certainly not what I observe today in Europe or the US.

The French author Alain Soral has proposed what I think is a brilliant motto to deal with this situation in France. He has called his movement "Equality and Reconciliation" and as of right now, this is the only political movement in France which does not want to favor one group at the expense of the other. Everybody else either wants to oppress the "français de souche" (the native, mostly White and Roman-Catholic majority) on behalf of the "français de branche" (immigrants, naturalized citizens, minorities), or oppress the "français de branche" on behalf of the "français de souche". Needless to say, the only ones who benefit from this clash is the ruling Zionist elite (best represented by the infamous CRIF , which makes the US AIPAC look comparatively honorable and weak). As for Soral, he is vilified by the official French media with no less hate than Trump is vilified in the US by the US Ziomedia.

Still, equality and reconciliation are the two things which the majorities absolutely must offer the minorities if they want to prevent the latter to fall prey to the manipulation techniques used by those forces who want to turn everybody into obedient and clueless serfs. Those majorities who delude themselves and believe that they can simply solve the "minority problem" by expelling or otherwise making these minorities disappear are only kidding themselves. To 'simply' solve the "minority problem' by cracking down on these minorities inevitably

Grandpa Charlie > , August 26, 2017 at 6:29 am GMT

"While we all typically [have] several co-existing identities inside us (say, German, retired, college-educated, female, Buddhist, vegetarian, exile, resident of Brazil, etc. as opposed to just "White"), in manipulated minorities one such identity (skin color, religion, etc.) becomes over-bloated and trumps all the others." -- The Saker

That's a great critique of "identity politics" and one reason why identity politics is self-limiting, maybe even self-destructive (as well as destructive of democracy).

Fran Macadam > , Website August 26, 2017 at 6:56 am GMT

To distill it to an aphorism, "A million guys with one buck, are no match for one guy with a million bucks."

Grandpa Charlie > , August 26, 2017 at 7:13 am GMT

Another point: The poorer people are, the more vulnerable they are to identity politics.

It's like an Indian movie I once saw that was constructed as a family history. When the family experienced many setbacks, one after another, until they were all disheartened, the patriarch of the family spoke up, saying, "Remember, we are Bengali!" That was the turning point in the film: after that things began to improve for the family so that the film could have a happy Bolliwood ending.

That was like saying, "Remember, we have a proud history!"

There was also a Yiddish joke that someone told me, like this: There was a young Jewish man in some place like Minsk, somewhere in Eastern Europe, and he saw an advertisement by none other than a great member of the Rothschild banking family. The ad said "Wanted: young Jewish man for difficult and physically challenging assignment." So the hero (or anti-hero?) of this story set out immediately for Paris. Unfortunately, our hero experienced many tragedies, even losing an arm and a leg. But he was determined and he persevered, with the help of a crutch. Finally, he had to camp out in front of the gate of the Rothschild mansion outside of Paris.

Eventually, the great Rothschild had his carriage stop and spoke to the man, saying, "You know, I've seen you standing here day after day what is it that you want?"

Our hero brought out the advertisement that he had carried with him through all his misadventures. The great Rothschild read the advertisement and exclaimed, "What's the matter with you? Did you not read that the job was physically challenging?" To which our hero responded, "Yes, but, Mr. Rothschild, the ad says "young Jewish man."

Being myself a gentile, I did not at first get the joke, but eventually I got a chuckle out of it.

WorkingClass > , August 26, 2017 at 9:24 am GMT

What do all races, genders, nationalities and creeds have in common? An overwhelming majority of them are working class. That's why I am white and Nationalist but not a White Nationalist. The working class wants work and wages. The ruling class gives us war and welfare. Solidarity is the only effective defense against concentrated wealth. Absent solidarity the working class is a one legged man in an ass kicking contest. Witness the American prole. Simultaneously under the lash and at each others throats.

Mao Cheng Ji > , August 26, 2017 at 11:17 am GMT

Here's a similar sentiment, by Nassim Taleb: https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15

Anonymous > , Disclaimer August 26, 2017 at 4:24 pm GMT

I also lived for 5 years in Washington, DC, which was something like 70% Black and, at the time, openly and often rudely hostile to Whites (I never thought of myself as a color before, but I sure felt like one during those 5 years). And now I am a "legal alien" living in the US. Anyway, while I am "White" (what a nonsensical category!)

Nonsensical? Really? Both the DC blacks and their DC (((paymasters))) hate your "category" but you're still confused and want to hold hands and educate them ? Do you have children?

The French author Alain Soral has proposed what I think is a brilliant motto to deal with this situation in France. He has called his movement "Equality and Reconciliation" and as of right now, this is the only political movement in France which does not want to favor one group at the expense of the other.

Demographically speaking, the native French group ( white category FYI) is already doomed to lose their homeland unless they reverse the invasion and punish the plotters. Reconciling with their invaders would be assisted suicide, surely. Almost as bad as the forced miscegenation idea proposed by Nicolas "Jew Midget" Sarkozy a few years back.

You need to wake up and check for any vitamin/mineral deficiencies you might have, Saker. Our ancestors butchered countless invaders to give us the land we're standing on – they didn't reconcile it away.

Bartolo > , August 26, 2017 at 6:55 pm GMT

Excellent diagnosis, ridiculous therapy.

One single question shows how profoundly silly The Saker's his "solution" is:

Why would it be easier to convince resentful, envious minorities to just get along with the majority than to convince the elites to act better, according to the noblesse oblige principle?

Elites will always misuse their power. Minorities/majorities will always quarrel and resent each other.

Give us (back) ethnically homogeneous states instead. No panacea, but the besf we can hope for.

Cyrano > , August 26, 2017 at 7:52 pm GMT

The ruling elites of US (both democrats and republicans) can be divided into 2 categories:
1. The ones who think that they are better because of their race.
2. The ones who think that they are better because they were able to overcome the feeling of being better because of their race. In other words – the morally superior ubermensch instead of racially superior ubermensch.

In reality, category 2 doesn't exist (at least not among the ruling elites) – they are all liars. They haven't been able to overcome any feeling of superiority, they just added another one – the one of moral superiority. Actually, the ruling elites for the most part are still category 1, only pretending to be category 2. Not only do they feel they are superior to other races, they feel they are superior to their own race – the poorer members of it.

The ruling elites are manipulating the population of US into declaring that they belong in either one of these 2 camps. Result: Charlottesville riots.

RDM10005 > , August 26, 2017 at 8:46 pm GMT

I already wrote about that here http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2016/08/29/deep-state-plutocrat-elite-use-protected-classes-to-do-their-dirty-work/ 2 years ago and published last year. This is old hat and old news.

Issac > , August 26, 2017 at 8:54 pm GMT

This post would sound eminently reasonable if the white identitarians had any kind of state blessing, but they are a de facto criminal element being suppressed. Not for the sake of democracy, but for the sake of the elite who are Jewish, not Zionist, and not very Anglo.

White nationalism would have zero credibility if actual white leadership were transparently in control over the state. The wellspring of their support comes from the fact that what whites do exist in the power structure are absolutely and transparently subservient to other interests.

Ricard > , August 27, 2017 at 4:50 am GMT

While we all typically several co-existing identities inside us

Spot the missing verb.

Alden > , August 27, 2017 at 4:57 am GMT

@Fran Macadam Here is the mantra of political fund raisers. " it's easier to get one donor to give $1,000 than to get 20 donors to give $50 apiece."

jocose > , August 27, 2017 at 5:02 am GMT

One of the problems is that the US was (and still is) a republic-with a small r. The republican form of government assumes that the voters are too stupid or ignorant to pass laws, so they have to hire professional political types to write their governing laws for them. The politicos are easy targets for the powers that be to manipulate, evidently.

Beckow > , August 27, 2017 at 6:33 am GMT

The problem is – as always – with the numbers. The large influx of migrants is changing the demographics and that changes the goals and behaviour of each group. The minority groups can see the promised land in the future when they will take over. The majority knows that they cannot stop it by "equality and reconciliation" (whatever that would mean in practise, maybe endless workshops to whine about each other?).

The numbers game has gone too far and there is no easy way to restore stability. E.g. the labor markets in the West cannot be fixed without drastic restrictions on supply of new labor from the Third World. The article has some valuable insights, but the lame 'solution' it suggests is useless.

Another issue not addressed is that many minorities are a majority in their regions leading to a geographic instability by putting borders in question. That separation actually makes sense in many cases.

What we have had for some time are the elites behaving badly, they have stopped being responsible and thoughtful. The best solution I can see would be for the elites to sober up and start taking their role seriously again. Short of that, we will have chaos, and not the fun type of chaos. Those are the wages of the baby boomer idiocy.

jilles dykstra > , August 27, 2017 at 6:48 am GMT

Manipulated majorities are an even greater danger. At the last French elections the political elite did anything possible to prevent Front National getting legal political power. With fifteen % of the votes, of those who bothered to vote, some 44%, Macron got an absolute majority in French parliament, some 360 seats. FN six or so. Yet, alas, anyone knows he won the elections, but not the streets.

As his popularity goes down, Sun King habits, the strikes announced for 11 and 12 September will show who really is in power in France.

bliss_porsena > , August 27, 2017 at 6:59 am GMT

Some minorities are more equal than others. The Deep State, for example.

unpc downunder > , August 27, 2017 at 7:11 am GMT

If you want to lesson the influence of minorities in western democracies, then its essential to provide a more a la carte form of democracy that is less open to elite manipulation. Options include getting rid of political parties and voting directly for heads of government departments, or allowing voters to vote on which party gets to run each of the key government departments.

It's impossible to have a functional political system when the political parties themselves are allowed to decide what issues voters get to vote on, and can racially divide the electorate by providing policy packages which play to voter weaknesses. This results in absurd results like blacks in the US voting for mass unskilled immigration via the Democrats, and poor American whites voting for increased defense spending and financial liberalisation via the Republicans.

There is no way around this problem without radically changing the political system.

Jason Liu > , August 27, 2017 at 8:01 am GMT

Easier said than done. Most minorities would support anti-majority politics even IF they knew they were being manipulated. You severely underestimate the human attraction to tribalism.

A more plausible plan would be to turn minorities against so-called 'AngloZionist' values, which is already partially complete, since minorities are rarely Anglos and therefore don't subscribe to their values as much. Have a look at any SJW gathering. Always disproportionately white, even in very diverse cities. It's much easier to convince even longtime resident minorities like blacks that things like transgenderism is bullshit, than it is to convince emotionally committed whites.

This would result in a country that allows multiple competing tribalisms, but none of which would be very useful as pawns by the elites. Not as good as homogeneity, but better than the current situation.

"Everybody gang up against the WEIRDs" is a nice thought and I would love to see it, but it's just not very likely.

peterAUS > , August 27, 2017 at 8:12 am GMT

There is only effective way defuse the explosive potential of minorities:

Educate minorities and explain to them that they are being manipulated
Educate those joining anti-minority movements that they are also being manipulated
Offer the minorities a future based on equality and reconciliation
Put the spotlight on those who fan the flames of conflict and try to turn minorities and majorities against each other

Surprisingly weak and naive.

A simple question:
What's wrong with Serb approach in Kosovo before Western intervention?
Spare me "virtue signalling" .. if you can.

I think it would've worked if West hadn't stepped up with overwhelming FORCE.
It worked in "Operation Storm". Serbs as victims but that's precisely the point.
Perfect example how it CAN work.

So .following the same logic ..if IF .West used the same approach why it wouldn't work?
Say .French government does exactly the same as Croats did with Serbs in Croatia or Serbs with Albanians/whatever in Kosovo.

Just curious.

Anyone?

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 11:44 am GMT

Excellent piece.

There is only effective way defuse the explosive potential of minorities:

Educate minorities and explain to them that they are being manipulated
Educate those joining anti-minority movements that they are also being manipulated

While those ideas have merit, I predict they'll be impossible to implement. Education is an active process and one cannot "be" educated in the passive sense. People, like other creatures, can be schooled and trained, but that's not the same as acquiring an education.

There are several reasons why the majority will never acquire any meaningful education. Most people simply do not possess the requisite curiosity to begin any sort of educational process and would rather make decisions based on immediate emotions. A true education requires active questioning of the standing myths and myths are evidently too comfortable for most to discard or even doubt. Most folks appear too lazy and or too timid to face the hard truths and would rather follow the dictates of some slick Peruna peddler.

A shocking percentage of people apparently love the feeling of "superiority" of "knowing" something even if their belief is utter, easily discardable, hogwash and actively reject any challenges to it. For example, the mindless charge of "conspiracy theorist" is used to dismiss, without thinking, anything but the spoon fed drivel they see on teevee.

I could go on, but this is already too long and is mostly preaching to the choir.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 12:15 pm GMT

@WorkingClass

The working class wants work and wages.

Which is a key reason that things are not likely to improve for at least a few more millennia. Accepting wages is a form of slavery, and most folks simply cannot see beyond that trap. The system has evolved so that people readily accept the idea of wages as a necessity (along with the extortion and theft known as taxes). There's a huge difference between making (earning) a living and holding a job for wages, but I doubt I'll ever be able to convince anyone of that.

Tolstoy wrote about the concept of wage slavery over a century ago and it makes good reading to this day.

"But in reality the abolition of serfdom and of [chattel] slavery was only the abolition of an obsolete form of slavery that had become unnecessary, and the substitution for it of a firmer form of slavery and one that holds a greater number of people in bondage."

- Leo Tolstoy

A few typos, but otherwise a fine summary: Tolstoy, Slavery of Our Times, Chap 8, 11 July, 1900 http://ebooks.gutenberg.us/WorldeBookLibrary.com/slaverytol.htm#1_0_7

The ruling class gives us war and welfare. Solidarity is the only effective defense against concentrated wealth. Absent solidarity the working class is a one legged man in an ass kicking contest. Witness the American prole. Simultaneously under the lash and at each others throats.

All true, except the part about solidarity, which would definitely be a huge step in the right direction for us proles and peasants, but is probably as unobtainable as true education of the masses.

As I see it, the best an individual can do is to toss a monkey wrench into the system whenever we can get away with it, but that requires an understanding of who are enemies are and that seems nearly impossible to achieve. Thus it's effective only in theory. In practice, it's probably as ephemeral as a gas emission in a tornado.

anonymous > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 12:31 pm GMT

@Beckow

Short of that, we will have chaos, and not the fun type of chaos.

Chaos is on the march.

It appears the minority has magically organized itself and planned a 10-day march from Charlottesville to DC, there to demand the impeachment/removal of Donald Trump, and to carry on a non-violent occupation (irony alert).

http://thehill.com/homenews/news/348136-ten-day-march-from-charlottesville-to-dc-to-start-monday

anonymous > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 12:35 pm GMT

@unpc downunder

then its essential to provide a more a la carte form of democracy that is less open to elite manipulation.

you mean something like state's sovereignty, which is what Robert E Lee stood for?

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 12:35 pm GMT

@jilles dykstra

Manipulated majorities are an even greater danger.

An even bigger threat is the manipulat ing minorities aka certain (most?) elements of the money bag crowd.

This problem has been recognized for millennia and was discussed in detail by many early Americans who nevertheless argued in favor of a constitution and a centralized bureaucracy that favored the rich.

Virtue cannot dwell with wealth either in a city or in a house.

-Diogenes of Sinope, quoted by Stobaeus, iv. 31c. 88

But if you will take note of the mode of proceedings of men, you will see that all those who come to great riches and great power have obtained them either by fraud or by force; and afterwards, to hide the ugliness of acquisition, they make it decent by applying the false title of earnings to things they have usurped by deceit or by violence.

- Niccolo Machiavelli , HISTORY OF FLORENCE AND OF THE AFFAIRS OF ITALY, Book 3 chap 3Para 8

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/2464/2464-h/2464-h.htm#link2H_4_0022

" wealth is no proof of moral character; nor poverty of the want of it. On the contrary, wealth is often the presumptive evidence of dishonesty; and poverty the negative evidence of innocence."

THOMAS PAINE, DISSERTATION ON FIRST-PRINCIPLES OF GOVERNMENT, 1795

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/ecco/004809392.0001.000/1:2?rgn=div1;view=fulltext

Robert Magill > , August 27, 2017 at 1:26 pm GMT

AfroAmericans who are descended from slaves should take into account the fact that their ancestors were protected because they had value. As a result they now number some 42 million and produced the last President. Comparison with the indigenous natives who after centuries of genocide number about 2 million and are mostly on reservations should give pause.

https://robertmagill.wordpress.com/2017/08/26/issues-seen-and-not-seen/

War for Blair Mountain > , August 27, 2017 at 2:27 pm GMT

Dear Saker

Nonwhites within the borders of the US are not innocent bystanders They are enthusiastically voting The Historic Native Born White American Majority into a violently persecuted racial minority within the borders of America..

If you have a greater identification with Muslim "Americans" and Hindu "Americans" than European American Natives then just go back to Russia..and take the Hindus and Muslims with you.

It wasn't very nice of you not to let my comment go through yesterday in response to commenter Eric .on The Vineyard of the Saker

You are waging demographic warfare against my Racial Tribe .

Intelligent Dasein > , Website August 27, 2017 at 2:33 pm GMT

@Robert Magill Barack Obama was not the descendant of any African slaves, you idiot.

War for Blair Mountain > , August 27, 2017 at 2:38 pm GMT

@WorkingClass The Chinese in California are Chinese Race Nationalist The Hindus in California are Hindu Race Nationalists You are a Civic Nationalist Cuck.

Michael Kenny > , August 27, 2017 at 2:42 pm GMT

Using minorities as an excuse to oppress majorities is a classic colonial technique. The British set themselves up as the "protectors" of the Muslims in India, the Turks in Cyprus and the Protestants in Ireland, for example. Putin justifies his actions in Ukraine by claiming that he is "protecting" the ethnic Russian minority from the dastardly ethnic Ukrainian majority. Ditto for the various cyber-attacks on Estonia. One assumes that the same treatment would be meted out to the Belarusians if they dared to assert their national sovereignty. The US captive nations legislation the author refers to includes Belarus (designated "White Ruthenia"), Ukraine and the three Baltic republics. I am unaware of any alliance ever having existed, or existing today, between Serbia and Russia. Like "Eurasia", that "alliance" seems to have been invented by US neocons when they were trying to use Putin as an "asset".

War for Blair Mountain > , August 27, 2017 at 2:45 pm GMT

Saker

Is it ok with you that the Chinese and Hindus in California voted The Historic Native Born White American Majority in California into a racial minority?

Anon > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 2:49 pm GMT

"Manipulated minorities represent a major danger to democratic states."

Well, yes. But the manipulation of minorities to change legal frameworks or disassemble governments has been ongoing since the French Revolution. 'They' first foster a sense of oppression, more or less justified, then move to grant the new rights. Monarchies suffered the strategy. Europe should know the drill, witness the received oral tradition "Czechoslovaquia is another spelling for Rothschild."

Breaking up the US along racial lines is exactly what 'they' want. They want the fighting "whites" to come out, give the reason for changes in law. The Trump impeachment is deliberate provocation.

There has never been a 'white nation', it is a silly, ahistorical idea. Nations are built around culture. Fight for the culture. Use the damn high IQ.

Intelligent Dasein > , Website August 27, 2017 at 3:03 pm GMT

@Michael Kenny

I am unaware of any alliance ever having existed, or existing today, between Serbia and Russia.

There was a little tiff called World War One. It was in a couple of papers.

Arithtoddle > , August 27, 2017 at 3:09 pm GMT

@Issac "White nationalism would have zero credibility if actual white leadership were transparently in control over the state."

Nope, but thanks for playing. White nationalism would have zero credibility if the leadership actually promoted American–WASP–interests. There is no escaping the Posterity clause, period. There is no magic dirt, no civic nationalism, no immersion in American culture, that can replace descendants of the English colonists that understand the importance of the Rights of Englishmen. The US was never intended to be the world's largest rest stop for every poor downtrodden person on Earth. Minorities now all undocumented immigrants since 1965 (Hart-Cellar).

Homogeneous nation's are born from Heterogeneous nation's. We are witnesses to the birth pains. The length of the labor depends on how long the majority will tolerate the minorities. Reconciliation isn't just impossible–its not even on the table, unless you reverse time. They. Have. To. Go. Back.

War for Blair Mountain > , August 27, 2017 at 3:21 pm GMT

@Anon Well..you are wrong about that..America since it's inception has always been a White Nation If you don't believe me..just ask Professor Noel Ignatieve-the Father of White Studies. Where I differ from Professor Noel Ignatieve:I think it's GREAT that America has historically been a White Nation as did Socialist Labor Leader Samuel Gompers.

As far as your last two sentences go:Bring back the 1888 Chinese Legal Immigrant Exclusion Act!!!!

Saker

The highly racialized Nonwhite Democratic Party Voting Bloc is the Voting Bloc for War on Christian Russia not Trump's Whitey Racist Voting Bloc..

Wally > , August 27, 2017 at 3:25 pm GMT

@jacques sheete Well stated.

And of course, what 'education' would these minorities be given?

Take a look at what is given them now in our systems.
Absolute lies about, and hatred of, white gentiles.

Then there is the simple fact of minorities low IQs.
What, we think we're going to train dumb Africans to be engineers?

By and large these people are unemployable in a modern society.

The entire matter of somehow 'educating' these people in the true sense of the word is laughable.
Just look at the countries they come from.

Francis G. > , August 27, 2017 at 5:07 pm GMT

@Intelligent Dasein Damned right. If anything, he is the descendant of African slave traders . But his skin is sort of black and he's got a funky name, so he can pass as one of the "oppressed" minorities.

WorkingClass > , August 27, 2017 at 5:08 pm GMT

@jacques sheete 1 Timothy 5:18 ESV /
For the Scripture says, "You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain," and, "The laborer deserves his wages."

Wages are as old as dirt. I can understand why you find them objectionable. But with what will you replace them?

There's a huge difference between making (earning) a living and holding a job for wages, but I doubt I'll ever be able to convince anyone of that.

Try me.

I was a union man back in the day when private sector unions were active and had support in Washington. We had a contractual relationship with employers that was qualitatively different from serfdom or chattel slavery and a huge improvement over the wage slavery that prevailed before the American labor movement.

As ideologies go the Anarchists have the best of it. But even they are Utopians. Capitalism sux. There will never be a free market utopia. But neither will there be a workers paradise. Human beings are limited in what they can accomplish by human nature. That's the law. I'm only interested in what works in the real world, however imperfectly.

anonymous > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 5:13 pm GMT

Who said this:

Nature does not know political frontiers. She first puts the living beings on this globe and watches the free game of energies. He who is strongest in courage and industry receives, as her favorite child, the right to be the master of existence.

If a people limits itself to domestic colonization, at a time when other races cling to greater and greater surfaces of the earth's soil, it will be forced to exercise self-restriction even while other nations will continue to increase.

For some day this case will occur, and it will arrive the earlier the smaller the living space is that a people has at its disposal. As, unfortunately only too frequently, the best nations, or, better still, the really unique cultured races, the pillars of all human progress, in their pacifistic blindness decide to renounce the acquisition of new soil in order to content themselves with 'domestic* colonization, while
inferior nations know full well how to secure enormous areas on this earth for themselves, this would lead to the following result:

The culturally superior, but less ruthless, races would have to limit, in consequence of their limited soil, their increase even at a time when the culturally inferior, but more brutal and more natural, people, in consequence of their greater living areas, would be able to increase themselves without limit.

In other words: the world will, therefore, some day come into the hands of a mankind that is
inferior in culture but superior in energy and activity.

For then there will be only two possibilities in the no matter how distant future: either the world will be ruled according to the ideas of our modern democracy, and then the stress of every decision falls on the races which are stronger in numbers, or the world will be dominated according to the law of the natural order of energy, and then the people of brute strength will be victorious, and again, therefore, not the nations of self-restriction.

But one may well believe that this world will still be subject to the fiercest fights for the existence of mankind.
In the end, only the urge for self-preservation will eternally succeed. Under its pressure so-called 'humanity,' as the expression of a mixture of stupidity, cowardice, and an imaginary superior intelligence, will melt like snow under the March sun. Mankind has grown strong in eternal
struggles and it will only perish through eternal peace.

Hint: today in an appearance on an internationally broadcast program, a minion from Foundation for Defense of Democracy (FDD) dismissed as "conspiracy theory" the suggestion that the USA/(Trump admin) is involved in Afghanistan "because Afghanistan has vast lithium resources, which US needs for new technologies" [see this 2010 report, Read More

Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
yeah > , August 27, 2017 at 5:18 pm GMT

Minorities are nothing but trouble, even though political correctness demands that we not see that or dare to say so. History offers not a single – NOT ONE SINGLE – example of harmony and mutual love between the minorities and the majority in any community/country/nation. Prove me wrong, cite one significant exception.

Don't cite Italian-Americans and Polish-Americans in the American melting pot. They came with full intent to be melted, they came white, Christian, and western in outlook and culture. They came pre-cooked for the melting pot. Can't say the same for the Muslims streaming in today. Nor for the Hindus and the Orientals coming in today. Leaving aside the Muslims (not even worth discussing in any talk of assimilation), the Hindus and Orientals today stand aside and apart, both groups highly conscious of their groups' share in the American pie. The Hispanics will make Spanish the lingua Franca – already largely done in California. So what exactly can the melting of Spanish and English languages produce? Spanglish? No, it will be one or the other, depending on which group acquires demographic majority and sufficient political clout. Who will melt whom?

WorkingClass > , August 27, 2017 at 5:40 pm GMT

@Fran Macadam Unless a million guys are organized.

Cloak And Dagger > , August 27, 2017 at 6:00 pm GMT

@War for Blair Mountain

Is it ok with you that the Chinese and Hindus in California voted The Historic Native Born White American Majority in California into a racial minority?

Please elaborate on what you mean. I definitely do not see myself as a racial minority in California.

Art > , August 27, 2017 at 6:43 pm GMT

Manipulated Minorities Represent a Major Danger for Democratic States

The solution is an easy one – we must abandon the Jew Matrix of identity politics and return to the Christian Matrix of neighborliness.

Jew thought is about biological identity, and all the fear and hate associated with it – the Christian philosophical mindset is an intellectual entreaty to "love your neighbor as you love yourself." Hmm – one favors gonad driven actions – the other using our brains to overcome our biology, and make peace and abundance.

The differences are stark and profound – we can see what the Jew way has brought us – Jew tribalism is killing America and the West.

If we want a just kind world we cannot abandon philosophical Christianity.

Philosophical Christianity is not about "the virgin birth" and "the ascension into heaven" – it is about a practical way to peaceably live with each other and build an abundance for all.

Think Peace -- Art

nsa > , August 27, 2017 at 6:43 pm GMT

@Cloak And Dagger Non-Hispanic white is now down to 37.7% of the California population as of 2016 according to the U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts ..probably less if you include all the uncounted illegals.

Ivy > , August 27, 2017 at 7:22 pm GMT

@nsa Will the increased supply of labor result in lower gardening bills? Or take-out food bills?

Logan > , August 27, 2017 at 7:29 pm GMT

"I would even argue that the Empire has created several nation ex nihilo (What in the world is a "Belarussian"?!)."

Hey, us Anglo-Zionists didn't create Belarus. That was an indigenous or possibly German puppet state created (sort of) in early 1918. It was then conquered by the Bolsheviks and reborn as the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, a constituent republic of the USSR till it fell apart, at which point it became (sort of) independent.

The Anglo-Zionists had nothing to do with any of this, with probable exception of the collapse of the USSR.

Logan > , August 27, 2017 at 7:33 pm GMT

@jacques sheete Since you consider "working for wages" as not "making a living," I'm curious what you would consider to constitute "making a living."

Yeoman farmer?

Small businessman?

Bank robber?

Logan > , August 27, 2017 at 7:37 pm GMT

@Intelligent Dasein Actually, if we go back a dozen or two generations, it's probable most people on the planet are descended from both slaveowners and slaves. Especially if you're a little loose with the definition of slave.

Logan > , August 27, 2017 at 7:44 pm GMT

@Bragadocious If we had ever made a serious consistent effort to kill all the Indians, they'd be gone. But there seem to be quite a few of them still around. About 5M, in fact, considerably more than lived in the boundaries of the USA in 1491.

Argentina had similar Indian problems during the same time period (late 19th century) we were fighting our final Indian wars. But they had a different approach: extermination.

Quite successful at it, too. Very few Indians left in Argentina. And they didn't import any other minorities, which means Argentina is now upwards of 90% "white." Much more so than USA, in fact.

Miro23 > , August 27, 2017 at 8:27 pm GMT

If we accept that minorities are typically much more driven than most of the population, then we also immediately can see why their influence over society is often out of proportion with the numerical demographical "weight". This has nothing to do with these minorities being more intelligent or more creative and everything to do with them willing to being spend much more time and efforts towards their objectives than most people.

It's true that there is greater activism, but the key ingredient is probably ethnic patronage.

A.H. gave an (approving) explanation of how it works:

"In the old Austria, nothing could be done without patronage. That's partly explained by the fact that nine million Germans were in fact rulers, in virtue of an unwritten law, of fifty million non-Germans. This German ruling class took strict care that places should always be found for Germans. For them this was the only method of maintaining themselves in this privileged situation. The Balts of German origin behaved in the same way towards the Slav population."

Hitler's Table Talk. Conversation Nº 109, 15th-16th January 1942

American Jewry has been following the same policy since the early 1900′s, pushing for Jewish candidates in key placings, who if successful, are expected to return the favour. On a "level playing field" this has a ratchet effect whereby corporate management and key media, finance and government positions can be gradually taken over with Anglos squeezed out in a rather unobvious way ("He wasn't the right candidate for reasons A,B,C X,Y,Z").

prusmc > , August 27, 2017 at 8:34 pm GMT

@jacques sheete Jacquez:

Educate the minorities! I have bwen hearing that for over 50 years. I believe that was a substantial rationale for Federal Aid to education. How has it worked? What does the US Census data show for the indicator median education level persons over 25 years of age in 1960 demonstrate when compared to 2010? Compare for both white and black. Wow! we all are much smarter. Okay, as Rodney King so aptly stated it "why can' t everbody just get along?"

Tradecraft46 > , August 27, 2017 at 8:40 pm GMT

Better still, they are making more enemies than they can put to any good use.

In that world, enemies validate, in the real world, it invites total destruction.

None of them, being religious and all, never count the costs, which Jesus suggested.

Lawrence Fitton > , August 27, 2017 at 8:52 pm GMT

@Wally okay wally, i'm only going to say this once, so please pay attention. the gas chambers were but one method by which jews were killed. starvation, disease, forced labor, firing squads, killed legions. what if it was only 4 million jews who perished in the camps? or 3? does that make it better.
one last thing: elie wiesel is not the wonderful man he is purported to be.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 8:59 pm GMT

@WorkingClass

Wages are as old as dirt. I can understand why you find them objectionable. But with what will you replace them?

Dear Sir, as I've often stated, I like what you have to say and agree with 99% of it. I also respect the fact that your reply to me was obviously respectful and sincere.

My usual answer to your question is to replace them with nothing. For example if I had a case of the gleet, I'd rather not replace it; I'd rather do without. Instead of wages and a time clock, I advocate finding other (hopefully respectable) sources of income.

I realize that in this environment, it's nearly impossible to do without wages, but that shows how much our system sux, hence my objection to them and the system. I pretty much became disgusted with the concept after working at a few jobs that were really akin to slavery or some other unsavory paid profession, so I worked to make a living without punching time clock. That's not to say that I did not receive money for my services, but I managed to do without a direct boss during my earning days. Several other rather cantankerous members of my family manged to do the same, and some still do. I'm not saying that to brag, but to point out that it can be done.

I do admit that it now seems nearly impossible to do that sort of thing, but a close neighbor, in his thirty's, manages to do that and does quite well. He does have the advantage of both a good work ethic and access to a family business though.

The bottom line for me is that it's too bad that we have to submit to bosses for the most part to earn a living. From that we seem to learn to submit to other forms of "authority" with little or no questioning, and it seems to be a downhill slide from there. Also, the more power the bosses get, they more they control, and the less chance there is for people to become independent. that's no way to live.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 9:09 pm GMT

@Logan

Since you consider "working for wages" as not "making a living,"

That is a false statement. It is both illogical and unreasonable based on what I actually said.

Working for wages in one of several ways of earning a living. It just happens to be, in my way of thinking, one of the least desirable for many reasons.

I'm curious what you would consider to constitute "making a living."

Yeoman farmer?

Small businessman?

Bank robber?

All of the above, and many more.

Skeptikal > , August 27, 2017 at 9:12 pm GMT

@Logan Belorusian.
One r.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 9:14 pm GMT

@prusmc

Educate the minorities! I have bwen hearing that for over 50 years. I believe that was a substantial rationale for Federal Aid to education.

Most folks are entirely ineducable and seem to like it that way. Of course, it's a fine sounding pretext for mass brainwashing and it's attendant bureaucracy and source of profits.

How has it worked?

It's probably worked just as intended but not at all as advertised!

See John Taylor Gatto and Upton Sinclair's "The Goslings" and the Goosestep" which basically describe schooling in America as a tool for corporations.

Tim Howells > , August 27, 2017 at 9:23 pm GMT

@Lawrence Fitton

what if it was only 4 million jews who perished in the camps? or 3? does that make it better?

Well, in several countries you can go to jail, and many have, for saying it was less than 6, so go figure. Norman Finkelstein was destroyed by the "Holocaust Industry" for showing in the simplest terms that if you add up the numbers of supposed "victims" and "survivors", the official figures are patently absurd. The more you dig, the more absurd it gets.

attilathehen > , August 27, 2017 at 9:59 pm GMT

The Saker: You are not a "minority." You are a Caucasian, the European branch, ethnically Russian. You are Christian, specifically Orthodox. You are one of the interesting groups that make up the Caucasian peoples. You have nothing in common with blacks/Asians.

The Democratic party is the party of nonwhites, non-Christians, sexual degenerates. Manipulation has nothing to do with this. Minorities know they are inferiors. What they are doing is because they realize they can never accomplish what Caucasians/Europeans/ Christians/neopagans have accomplished. This means it is time for separation/deportation/repatriation.

This is coming. An RCC priest "confessed" to having been in the KKK when he was a teenager. The US Conference of Bishops has established an ad hoc committee to address racism. This is the final nail in the coffin of the RCC. Homosexuals have taken over the priesthood. Priests do not preach about hell, sin, repentance. Now that this KKK priest has been exposed, from now on sermons will only cover "racism," the worst sin.

Caucasian Christans/pagans have to deal with the reality that world history can be summed up in two words: IQ, which is tied to race. The past 2000 years of Western civilization united under the RCC are gone. There has to be a new paradigm shift to deal with the future and what needs to be done.

Delinquent Snail > , August 27, 2017 at 10:13 pm GMT

@anonymous I hope they act like they have at every event they have been a part of and the president acts accordingly. Trump needs to hire people to record the whole thing and put it all up on a new website thats created just to host the event. Dozens of live feeds from dozens of angles. All put up on this new website just so there will be no confusion. Once the left riots, because they will riot, National guard needs to be called and these domestic terrorists need to be put down. He then needs to put out an executive order to shut down all propaganda news agencies that are spinning this, and if people want to see what happened, view the live feeds from dozens of angles on the newly created website. And if people bitch about how its wrong to have this up, fuck them. Its time to take off the kiddy gloves.

Mulegino1 > , August 27, 2017 at 10:24 pm GMT

@Tim Howells It was more like around 300,000 in all of the German camps since their inception back in the mid-1930′s, according to the International Red Cross. And that refers to all camp inmates of all ethnic backgrounds.

It is entirely possible that many Jews may have been killed on the Eastern Front or in the Soviet Union, but that can hardly be blamed solely upon the Germans, who were not known to be savagely cruel or vengeful- even though the anti-partisan actions may have led to some excesses.

In any case, there is zero evidence for "millions of Jews" killed by the Germans. There are no mass graves commensurate with such figures, nor is there any documentary evidence of a deliberate plan of "extermination."

WorkingClass > , August 27, 2017 at 10:25 pm GMT

@jacques sheete I understand you quite well I think. I have worked on commission. I have been self employed. For a time I was a soldier. I have worked for wages for mom and pop business and for large corporations and held both union and non union jobs. I did a few years working for a not for profit homeless shelter. I am a Jack of all trades and (unfortunately) master of none.

On union jobs (IBEW and Teamsters) I had the great benefit of having a contract with my employer that spelled out the duties and privileges of both the worker and the company. This meant that both labor and management worked from the same set of rules. The path to promotion was defined as was the possible cause for termination. Personalities had nothing to do with anything. The boss and I followed the same rules. It was nothing like being subject to the whims and prejudices of one man.

" For example if I had a case of the gleet, I'd rather not replace it; I'd rather do without."

Having a "job" can be worse than the gleet.
Unfortunately a mans gotta eat.

Thanks for coming back.

nsa > , August 27, 2017 at 10:29 pm GMT

@Ivy The white trash (as of 2016, down to 37.7% of California's population) has simply been replaced by brown trash in California. The only question remaining is which ethnic elite will run the state ..the jooies or the chinkies or the hindus. Or will the ethnics simply rule via a de facto coalition? Whitey's demise in CA is an accomplished fact ..with AZ and TX soon to follow and eventually OR, WA, ID, and CO. The efforts of James K. Polk are soon to be fully reversed. And yes, Ivy, you will have employment ..every Chinese has been promised a white house boy and white concubine by 2050.

Ivy > , August 27, 2017 at 10:49 pm GMT

@nsa I'll be long dead by 2050 but will miss those Chinese masseuses.

Cloak And Dagger > , August 27, 2017 at 10:51 pm GMT

@Lawrence Fitton

the gas chambers were but one method by which jews were killed

There is much contention as to whether even a single jew was killed in a gas chamber. Asserting that statement can land you in jail in much of Europe.

anonymous > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 11:15 pm GMT

@Logan Chaim Weizmann, who obtained the Balfour Declaration from the British, and went on to become first president of Israel, hailed from Belarus.

hunor > , August 27, 2017 at 11:22 pm GMT

the same tolerant technology has been applied five thousand years ago in the Sumerian civilization
what was a non semitic composed society. Few hundred years prior to the destruction of that culture
semitic tribes were allowed to settle in, first in smaller numbers , then in the name of tolerance larger migrating groups were allowed , and enjoyed benefits of education, comfortable, cultured living. The original majority of the population were builders and workers , the migrants for the most part were users, who's interest were to find an easy way to become the more. The complete opposite of mentality. In time the semitic migrants were able to build up a fifth column , moved in to powerful positions such as religion and astrology , and from then on destruction has begun. The original populous were pushed out, part of them were forcefully crossbred , the rest of them flee and
build new countries in Europa . The migrants of that time gained written culture , tailored clothing ,
the benefit of toilet so not to go to the bushes to relieve themselves . This time around there is no place left to flee.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 11:25 pm GMT

@WorkingClass I, too, think I understand from whence you come.

I agree with the concept of labor unions but recognize that they too can be turned against the interests of the workers, and unfortunately, have been.

I do applaud you for your success working within the system and I have no doubt that you did it as a sincere, able and good man. I also respect your views and thank you for sharing them.

As for bosses, I loathe them so much that I myself never hired employees because I didn't want to be a boss any more than I wanted to answer to one. I almost get physically sick when I see that the window of opportunity for youngsters to follow a independent lifestyle is next to nil and getting tougher all the time.

I do still counsel my younger relatives to acquire as much experience as they can so that they are in a position to have some control over their own lives. I'm also actively involved in fortifying my grandkids with both defiance and the attitudes and skills to back it up.

Is that attitude Utopian? No doubt to some degree it is, but so is the attitude of submission, i.e., the wish for everything to be taken care of so long as one submits.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 11:34 pm GMT

@Cloak And Dagger

There is much contention as to whether even a single jew was killed in a gas chamber.

Not only is there much contention, but there is no credible evidence that it really happened. Besides, the numbers are farcical.

Where do they get 6 million?

"Allowing for a maximum of 100,000 who succeeded in emigrating from Europe, this would bring the total number of Jews under the direct rule of Nazi Germany to about 3,200,000."

Distribution of the Jewish Population of Europe 1933-. 1940," prepared by Mr. Moses Moskowitz
AMERICAN JEWISH YEAR BOOK 1941-1942, page 662

http://www.ajcarchives.org/AJC_DATA/Files/1941_1942_9_Statistics.pdf

I haven't checked in a while, but I wonder if the link is still active

Jake > , August 27, 2017 at 11:43 pm GMT

"I submit that the real truth is totally different. My thesis is very simple: the reason why the US always support foreign minorities to subvert states and use domestic minorities to suppress the majority US population is because minorities are very easy to manipulate and because minorities present no threat to the real rulers of the AngloZionist Empire. That's all there is to it."

That is pretty much it, save for the origins. WASP culture's Germanic basis began by hating the native British Isles. That set the pattern:WASPs most hate those from whom they steal or otherwise wrong gravely. The Reformation provided the perfect theological and philosophical justifications for that pattern to become something much greater.

The Anglo-Saxon Puritans were Judaizing heretics. You cannot over-emphasize that point. WASAP culture from the moment it was crystalized, truly formed, was one that saw the world through Jewish-influenced, Jewish-fawning, eyes. Naturally and inevitably, once the true WASPs gained total control of the government, with the Puritan Revolution, their fearless leader, Oliver Cromwell, allied with Jews. He took Jewish money to wage war, to exterminate cultures and make at least virtual serfs of whole populations.

White Christian populations.

WASP culture began with an alliance with Jews, allowing Jews back into England, with special rights and privileges that the vast majority of British Isles native Christians did not have, that allowed the WASPs to continue waging war to exterminate white Christian cultures.

When WASPs encountered non-whites, they began to grasp the value of using them – non-whites and non-Christians – as tools and weapons with which to batter the white Christians they wished to destroy.

That is the reason the 'Anglo-Zionist Empire' uses minorities as it does.

You cannot separate the Jewish Problem from the WASP Problem. You cannot solve the Jewish Problem without solving the 'WASP Problem.

[Aug 27, 2017] Manipulated minorities represent a major danger for democratic states

Aug 27, 2017 | www.unz.com

My thesis is very simple: the reason why the US always support foreign minorities to subvert states and use domestic minorities to suppress the majority US population is because minorities are very easy to manipulate and because minorities present no threat to the real rulers of the AngloZionist Empire . That's all there is to it.

I think that minorities often, but not always, act and perceive things in a way very different from the way majority groups do. Here is what I have observed:

Let's first look at minorities inside the US:

They are typically far more aware of their minority identity/status than the majority. That is to say that if the majority is of skin color A and the minority of skin color B, the minority will be much more acutely aware of its skin color. They are typically much more driven and active then the majority. This is probably due to their more acute perception of being a minority. They are only concerned with single-issue politics , that single-issue being, of course, their minority status. Since minorities are often unhappy with their minority-status, they are also often resentful of the majority . Since minorities are mostly preoccupied by their minority-status linked issue, they rarely pay attention to the 'bigger picture' and that, in turn, means that the political agenda of the minorities typically does not threaten the powers that be . Minorities often have a deep-seated inferiority complex towards the putatively more successful majority. Minorities often seek to identify other minorities with which they can ally themselves against the majority.

To this list of characteristics, I would add one which is unique to foreign minorities, minorities outside the US: since they have no/very little prospects of prevailing against the majority, these minorities are very willing to ally themselves with the AngloZionist Empire and that, in turn, often makes them depended on the AngloZionist Empire, often even for their physical survival.

The above are, of course, very general characterizations. Not all minorities display all of these characteristics and many display only a few of them. But regardless of the degree to which any single minority fits this list of characteristics, what is obvious is that minorities are extremely easy to manipulate and that they present no credible (full-spectrum) threat to the Empire.

The US Democratic Party is the perfect example of a party which heavily relies on minority manipulation to maximize its power. While the Republican Party is by and large the party of the White, Anglo, Christian and wealthy voters, the Democrats try to cater to Blacks, women, Leftists, homosexuals, immigrants, retirees, and all others who feel like they are not getting their fair share of the proverbial pie. Needless to say, in reality there is only one party in the US, you can call the the Uniparty, the Republicracts or the Demolicans, but in reality both wings of the Big Money party stand for exactly the same things. What I am looking at here is not at some supposed real differences, but the way the parties present themselves. It is the combined action of these two fundamentally identical parties which guarantees the status quo in US politics which I like to sum up as "more of the same, only worse".

I would like to mention an important corollary of my thesis that minorities are typically more driven than the majority. If we accept that minorities are typically much more driven than most of the population, then we also immediately can see why their influence over society is often out of proportion with the numerical demographical "weight". This has nothing to do with these minorities being more intelligent or more creative and everything to do with them willing to being spend much more time and efforts towards their objectives than most people.

So we have easy to manipulate, small groups, whose agenda does not threaten the 1% (really, much less!), who like to gang up with other similar minorities against the majority. Getting scared yet? It gets worse.

Western 'democracies' are mostly democracies only in name. In most of them instead of "one man one vote" we see "one dollar one vote" meaning that big money decides, not "the people". Those in real power have immense financial resources which they cynically use to boost the already totally disproportional power of the various minorities. Now this is really scary:

Easy to manipulate, small groups, highly driven, whose agenda does not threaten the ruling plutocracy, who like to gang up with other similar minorities against the majority and whose influence is vastly increased by immense sums of money invested in them by the plutocracy. How is that for a threat to real people power, to the ideals of democracy?!

The frightening truth is that the combination of minorities and big money can easily hijack a supposedly 'democratic' country and subjugate the majority of its population to the "rule of the few over the many".

Once we look this reality in the face we should also become aware of a very rarely mentioned fact: while we are taught that democracies should uphold the right of the minorities, the opposite is true: real democracies should strive to protect majorities against the abuse of power from minorities!

I know, I have just committed a long list of grievous thoughtcrimes!

At those who might be angry at me, I will reply with a single sentence: please name me a western country where the views of the majority of its people are truly represented in the policies of their governments? And if you fail to come up with a good example, then I need to ask you if the majority is clearly not in power, then who is?

I submit that the plutocratic elites which govern the West have played a very simple trick on us all: they managed to focus our attention on the many cases in history when minorities were oppressed by majorities but completely obfuscated the numerous cases whereminorities oppressed majorities.

Speaking of oppression: minorities are far more likely to benefit and, therefore, use violence than the majority simply because their worldview often centers on deeply-held resentments. To put it differently, minorities are much more prone to settling scores for past wrongs (whether real or imagined) than a majority which typically does not even think in minority versus majority categories .

Not that majorities are always benign or kind towards minorities, not at all, humans being pretty much the same everywhere, but by the fact that they are less driven, less resentful and, I would argue, even less aware of their "majority status" they are less likely to act on such categories.

Foreign minorities play a crucial role in US foreign policy. Since time immemorial rulers have been acutely aware of the " divide et impera " rule, there is nothing new here. But the US has become the uncontested leader in the art of using national minorities to create strife and overthrow a disobedient regime. The AngloZionist war against the Serbian nation is the perfect example of how this is done: the US supported any minority against the Serbs, even groups that the US classified as terrorists, as long as this was against the Serbs. And, besides being Orthodox Slavs and traditional allies of Russia, what was the real 'crime' of the Serbs? Being the majority of course! The Serbs had no need of the AngloZionists to prevail against the various ethnic (Croats) and religious (Muslims) minorities they lived with. That made the Serbs useless to the Empire. But now that the US has created a fiction of an independent Kosovo, the Kosovo Albanians put up a statue of Bill Clinton in Prishtina and, more relevantly, allowed the Empire to build the Camp Bondsteel mega-base in the middle of their nasty little statelet, right on the land of the Serbian population that was ethnically cleansed during the Kosovo war. US democracy building at its best indeed

The same goes for Russia (and, the Soviet Union) where the US went as far as to support the right of self-determination for non-existing "captive nations" such as "Idel-Ural" and "Cossakia" . I would even argue that the Empire has created several nation ex nihilo (What in the world is a "Belarussian"?!).

I am fully aware that in the typical TV watching westerner any discussion of minorities focusing on their negative potential immediately elicits visions of hammers and sickles, smoking crematoria chimneys, chain gangs, lynchmobs, etc. This is basic and primitive conditioning. Carefully engineered events such as the recent riots in Charlottesville only further reinforce this type of mass conditioning. This is very deliberate and, I would add, very effective. As a result, any criticism, even just perceived criticism, of a minority immediately triggers outraged protests and frantic virtue-signaling (not me! look how good I am!!).

Of course, carefully using minorities is just one of the tactics used by the ruling plutocracy. Another of their favorite tricks is to created conflicts out of nothing or ridiculously bloat the visibility of an altogether minor topic (example: homo-marriages). The main rule remains the same though: create tensions, conflicts, chaos, subvert the current order (whatever that specific order might be), basically have the serfs fight each other while we rule .

In Switzerland an often used expression to describe "the people" is "the sovereign". This is a very accurate description of the status of the people in a real democracy: they are "sovereign" in the sense that nobody rules over them. In that sense, the issue in the United States is one of sovereignty: as of today, the real sovereign of the US are the corporations, the deep state, the Neocons, the plutocracy, the financiers, the Israel Lobby – you name it, anybody BUT the people.

In that system of oppression, minorities play a crucial role, even if they are totally unaware of this and even if, at the end of the day, they don't benefit from it. Their perception or their lack of achievements in no way diminishes the role that they play in the western pseudo-democracies.

How do with deal with this threat?

I think that the solution lies with the minorities themselves: they need to be educated about the techniques which are used to manipulate them, and they need to be convinced that their minority status does not, in reality, oppose them to the majority and that both the majority and the minorities have a common interest in together standing against those who seek to rule over them all. Striving to remain faithful to my "Putin fanboy" reputation, I will say that I believe that Russia under Putin is doing exactly the right thing by giving the numerous Russian minorities a stake in the future of the Russian state and by convincing the minorities that their interests and the interest of the majority of the people are fundamentally the same: being a minority does not have to mean being in opposition to the majority. It is a truism that minorities need to be fully integrated into the fabric of society and yet this is rarely practiced in the real world. This is certainly not what I observe today in Europe or the US.

The French author Alain Soral has proposed what I think is a brilliant motto to deal with this situation in France. He has called his movement "Equality and Reconciliation" and as of right now, this is the only political movement in France which does not want to favor one group at the expense of the other. Everybody else either wants to oppress the "français de souche" (the native, mostly White and Roman-Catholic majority) on behalf of the "français de branche" (immigrants, naturalized citizens, minorities), or oppress the "français de branche" on behalf of the "français de souche". Needless to say, the only ones who benefit from this clash is the ruling Zionist elite (best represented by the infamous CRIF , which makes the US AIPAC look comparatively honorable and weak). As for Soral, he is vilified by the official French media with no less hate than Trump is vilified in the US by the US Ziomedia.

Still, equality and reconciliation are the two things which the majorities absolutely must offer the minorities if they want to prevent the latter to fall prey to the manipulation techniques used by those forces who want to turn everybody into obedient and clueless serfs. Those majorities who delude themselves and believe that they can simply solve the "minority problem" by expelling or otherwise making these minorities disappear are only kidding themselves. To 'simply' solve the "minority problem' by cracking down on these minorities inevitably

Grandpa Charlie > , August 26, 2017 at 6:29 am GMT

"While we all typically [have] several co-existing identities inside us (say, German, retired, college-educated, female, Buddhist, vegetarian, exile, resident of Brazil, etc. as opposed to just "White"), in manipulated minorities one such identity (skin color, religion, etc.) becomes over-bloated and trumps all the others." -- The Saker

That's a great critique of "identity politics" and one reason why identity politics is self-limiting, maybe even self-destructive (as well as destructive of democracy).

Fran Macadam > , Website August 26, 2017 at 6:56 am GMT

To distill it to an aphorism, "A million guys with one buck, are no match for one guy with a million bucks."

Grandpa Charlie > , August 26, 2017 at 7:13 am GMT

Another point:

The poorer people are, the more vulnerable they are to identity politics.

It's like an Indian movie I once saw that was constructed as a family history. When the family experienced many setbacks, one after another, until they were all disheartened, the patriarch of the family spoke up, saying, "Remember, we are Bengali!" That was the turning point in the film: after that things began to improve for the family so that the film could have a happy Bolliwood ending.

That was like saying, "Remember, we have a proud history!"

There was also a Yiddish joke that someone told me, like this: There was a young Jewish man in some place like Minsk, somewhere in Eastern Europe, and he saw an advertisement by none other than a great member of the Rothschild banking family. The ad said "Wanted: young Jewish man for difficult and physically challenging assignment." So the hero (or anti-hero?) of this story set out immediately for Paris. Unfortunately, our hero experienced many tragedies, even losing an arm and a leg. But he was determined and he persevered, with the help of a crutch. Finally, he had to camp out in front of the gate of the Rothschild mansion outside of Paris. Eventually, the great Rothschild had his carriage stop and spoke to the man, saying, "You know, I've seen you standing here day after day what is it that you want?" Our hero brought out the advertisement that he had carried with him through all his misadventures. The great Rothschild read the advertisement and exclaimed, "What's the matter with you? Did you not read that the job was physically challenging?" To which our hero responded, "Yes, but, Mr. Rothschild, the ad says "young Jewish man."

Being myself a gentile, I did not at first get the joke, but eventually I got a chuckle out of it.

WorkingClass > , August 26, 2017 at 9:24 am GMT

What do all races, genders, nationalities and creeds have in common? An overwhelming majority of them are working class. That's why I am white and Nationalist but not a White Nationalist. The working class wants work and wages. The ruling class gives us war and welfare. Solidarity is the only effective defense against concentrated wealth. Absent solidarity the working class is a one legged man in an ass kicking contest. Witness the American prole. Simultaneously under the lash and at each others throats.

Mao Cheng Ji > , August 26, 2017 at 11:17 am GMT

Here's a similar sentiment, by Nassim Taleb:

https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15

Bragadocious > , August 26, 2017 at 1:28 pm GMT

Could it be out of a deep sense of guilt of having committed the only "pan-genocide" in human history

I guess Saker's never heard of the Ukranian Holodomor, perpetrated by his beloved Russia. And what were Spain, Portugal and Britain up to in the New World? This guy's a left-wing Euro clown.

Anonymous > , Disclaimer August 26, 2017 at 4:24 pm GMT

I also lived for 5 years in Washington, DC, which was something like 70% Black and, at the time, openly and often rudely hostile to Whites (I never thought of myself as a color before, but I sure felt like one during those 5 years). And now I am a "legal alien" living in the US. Anyway, while I am "White" (what a nonsensical category!)

Nonsensical? Really? Both the DC blacks and their DC (((paymasters))) hate your "category" but you're still confused and want to hold hands and educate them ? Do you have children?

The French author Alain Soral has proposed what I think is a brilliant motto to deal with this situation in France. He has called his movement "Equality and Reconciliation" and as of right now, this is the only political movement in France which does not want to favor one group at the expense of the other.

Demographically speaking, the native French group ( white category FYI) is already doomed to lose their homeland unless they reverse the invasion and punish the plotters. Reconciling with their invaders would be assisted suicide, surely. Almost as bad as the forced miscegenation idea proposed by Nicolas "Jew Midget" Sarkozy a few years back.

You need to wake up and check for any vitamin/mineral deficiencies you might have, Saker. Our ancestors butchered countless invaders to give us the land we're standing on – they didn't reconcile it away.

Bartolo > , August 26, 2017 at 6:55 pm GMT

Excellent diagnosis, ridiculous therapy.

One single question shows how profoundly silly The Saker's his "solution" is:

Why would it be easier to convince resentful, envious minorities to just get along with the majority than to convince the elites to act better, according to the noblesse oblige principle?

Elites will always misuse their power. Minorities/majorities will always quarrel and resent each other.

Give us (back) ethnically homogeneous states instead. No panacea, but the besf we can hope for.

Cyrano > , August 26, 2017 at 7:52 pm GMT

The ruling elites of US (both democrats and republicans) can be divided into 2 categories:
1. The ones who think that they are better because of their race.
2. The ones who think that they are better because they were able to overcome the feeling of being better because of their race. In other words – the morally superior ubermensch instead of racially superior ubermensch.

In reality, category 2 doesn't exist (at least not among the ruling elites) – they are all liars. They haven't been able to overcome any feeling of superiority, they just added another one – the one of moral superiority. Actually, the ruling elites for the most part are still category 1, only pretending to be category 2. Not only do they feel they are superior to other races, they feel they are superior to their own race – the poorer members of it.

The ruling elites are manipulating the population of US into declaring that they belong in either one of these 2 camps. Result: Charlottesville riots.

RDM10005 > , August 26, 2017 at 8:46 pm GMT

I already wrote about that here http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2016/08/29/deep-state-plutocrat-elite-use-protected-classes-to-do-their-dirty-work/ 2 years ago and published last year. This is old hat and old news.

Issac > , August 26, 2017 at 8:54 pm GMT

This post would sound eminently reasonable if the white identitarians had any kind of state blessing, but they are a de facto criminal element being suppressed. Not for the sake of democracy, but for the sake of the elite who are Jewish, not Zionist, and not very Anglo.

White nationalism would have zero credibility if actual white leadership were transparently in control over the state. The wellspring of their support comes from the fact that what whites do exist in the power structure are absolutely and transparently subservient to other interests.

Ricard > , August 27, 2017 at 4:50 am GMT

While we all typically several co-existing identities inside us

Spot the missing verb.

Alden > , August 27, 2017 at 4:57 am GMT

@Fran Macadam Here is the mantra of political fund raisers. " it's easier to get one donor to give $1,000 than to get 20 donors to give $50 apiece."

jocose > , August 27, 2017 at 5:02 am GMT

One of the problems is that the US was (and still is) a republic-with a small r. The republican form of government assumes that the voters are too stupid or ignorant to pass laws, so they have to hire professional political types to write their governing laws for them. The politicos are easy targets for the powers that be to manipulate, evidently.

ogunsiron > , August 27, 2017 at 5:08 am GMT

Soral is well meaning but i don't think his "réconciliation nationale" is possible. It's just not realistic.

The maghrebians/arabs who ally themselves with Soral are mostly preoccuppied with the "sionisme" question. They happen to agree with the traditional french right wing that the ((())) are a really big problem. A certain number of arabs/maghrebians are willing to rub shoulders with french extreme rightists to collaborate on fighting zion, but when Soral addresses legitimate grievances of the White French majority, I notice that the arabs/maghrebians are less interested.

There are a few, very few maghrebians who truly care about the White French people and who can see things from their perspective. A guy like Aldo Sterone is a good example of an arab who basically takes the White European side by default.

There are even fewer Black people who are able to get past their deep, deep resentment of Whites. Soral's reconciliation is already a very hard undertaking when it comes to arabs. It's pretty much a waste of time when it comes to Black Africans. Kemi Seba is a rare, very rare example of a black nationalist who has done a lot of work with White French nationalists. The rest of the black population in France can't be convinced to let go of their resentment, imho.

Wally > , Website August 27, 2017 at 5:51 am GMT

Saker tellingly left out direct mention of the usual enemies of free speech.

The facts are that Jews support Israeli immigration laws which specify JEWS ONLY, while they demand massive 3rd world immigration into the US & Europe?

He did say something which deserves praise:

"I am fully aware that in the typical TV watching westerner any discussion of minorities focusing on their negative potential immediately elicits visions of hammers and sickles, smoking crematoria chimneys , chain gangs, lynchmobs, etc. This is basic and primitive conditioning. Carefully engineered events such as the recent riots in Charlottesville only further reinforce this type of mass conditioning."

Mass conditioning indeed.

The '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' are scientifically impossible frauds.
see the 'holocaust' scam debunked here:

http://codoh.com

No name calling, level playing field debate here:

http://forum.codoh.com

"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize."

"Some stories are true that never happened."
- Elie Wiesel

Beckow > , August 27, 2017 at 6:33 am GMT

The problem is – as always – with the numbers. The large influx of migrants is changing the demographics and that changes the goals and behaviour of each group. The minority groups can see the promised land in the future when they will take over. The majority knows that they cannot stop it by "equality and reconciliation" (whatever that would mean in practise, maybe endless workshops to whine about each other?).

The numbers game has gone too far and there is no easy way to restore stability. E.g. the labor markets in the West cannot be fixed without drastic restrictions on supply of new labor from the Third World. The article has some valuable insights, but the lame 'solution' it suggests is useless.

Another issue not addressed is that many minorities are a majority in their regions leading to a geographic instability by putting borders in question. That separation actually makes sense in many cases.

What we have had for some time are the elites behaving badly, they have stopped being responsible and thoughtful. The best solution I can see would be for the elites to sober up and start taking their role seriously again. Short of that, we will have chaos, and not the fun type of chaos. Those are the wages of the baby boomer idiocy.

jilles dykstra > , August 27, 2017 at 6:48 am GMT

Manipulated majorities are an even greater danger.
At the last French elections the political elite did anything possible to prevent Front National getting legal political power.
With fifteen % of the votes, of those who bothered to vote, some 44%, Macron got an absolute majority in French parliament, some 360 seats.
FN six or so.
Yet, alas, anyone knows he won the elections, but not the streets.
As his popularity goes down, Sun King habits, the strikes announced for 11 and 12 September will show who really is in power in France.

bliss_porsena > , August 27, 2017 at 6:59 am GMT

Some minorities are more equal than others. The Deep State, for example.

unpc downunder > , August 27, 2017 at 7:11 am GMT

If you want to lesson the influence of minorities in western democracies, then its essential to provide a more a la carte form of democracy that is less open to elite manipulation. Options include getting rid of political parties and voting directly for heads of government departments, or allowing voters to vote on which party gets to run each of the key government departments.

It's impossible to have a functional political system when the political parties themselves are allowed to decide what issues voters get to vote on, and can racially divide the electorate by providing policy packages which play to voter weaknesses. This results in absurd results like blacks in the US voting for mass unskilled immigration via the Democrats, and poor American whites voting for increased defense spending and financial liberalisation via the Republicans.

There is no way around this problem without radically changing the political system.

Jason Liu > , August 27, 2017 at 8:01 am GMT

Easier said than done. Most minorities would support anti-majority politics even IF they knew they were being manipulated. You severely underestimate the human attraction to tribalism.

A more plausible plan would be to turn minorities against so-called 'AngloZionist' values, which is already partially complete, since minorities are rarely Anglos and therefore don't subscribe to their values as much. Have a look at any SJW gathering. Always disproportionately white, even in very diverse cities. It's much easier to convince even longtime resident minorities like blacks that things like transgenderism is bullshit, than it is to convince emotionally committed whites.

This would result in a country that allows multiple competing tribalisms, but none of which would be very useful as pawns by the elites. Not as good as homogeneity, but better than the current situation.

"Everybody gang up against the WEIRDs" is a nice thought and I would love to see it, but it's just not very likely.

peterAUS > , August 27, 2017 at 8:12 am GMT

There is only effective way defuse the explosive potential of minorities:

Educate minorities and explain to them that they are being manipulated
Educate those joining anti-minority movements that they are also being manipulated
Offer the minorities a future based on equality and reconciliation
Put the spotlight on those who fan the flames of conflict and try to turn minorities and majorities against each other

Surprisingly weak and naive.

A simple question:
What's wrong with Serb approach in Kosovo before Western intervention?
Spare me "virtue signalling" .. if you can.

I think it would've worked if West hadn't stepped up with overwhelming FORCE.
It worked in "Operation Storm". Serbs as victims but that's precisely the point.
Perfect example how it CAN work.

So .following the same logic ..if IF .West used the same approach why it wouldn't work?
Say .French government does exactly the same as Croats did with Serbs in Croatia or Serbs with Albanians/whatever in Kosovo.

Just curious.

Anyone?

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 11:44 am GMT

Excellent piece.

There is only effective way defuse the explosive potential of minorities:

Educate minorities and explain to them that they are being manipulated
Educate those joining anti-minority movements that they are also being manipulated

While those ideas have merit, I predict they'll be impossible to implement. Education is an active process and one cannot "be" educated in the passive sense. People, like other creatures, can be schooled and trained, but that's not the same as acquiring an education.

There are several reasons why the majority will never acquire any meaningful education. Most people simply do not possess the requisite curiosity to begin any sort of educational process and would rather make decisions based on immediate emotions. A true education requires active questioning of the standing myths and myths are evidently too comfortable for most to discard or even doubt. Most folks appear too lazy and or too timid to face the hard truths and would rather follow the dictates of some slick Peruna peddler.

A shocking percentage of people apparently love the feeling of "superiority" of "knowing" something even if their belief is utter, easily discardable, hogwash and actively reject any challenges to it. For example, the mindless charge of "conspiracy theorist" is used to dismiss, without thinking, anything but the spoon fed drivel they see on teevee.

I could go on, but this is already too long and is mostly preaching to the choir.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 12:15 pm GMT

@WorkingClass

The working class wants work and wages.

Which is a key reason that things are not likely to improve for at least a few more millennia. Accepting wages is a form of slavery, and most folks simply cannot see beyond that trap. The system has evolved so that people readily accept the idea of wages as a necessity (along with the extortion and theft known as taxes). There's a huge difference between making (earning) a living and holding a job for wages, but I doubt I'll ever be able to convince anyone of that.

Tolstoy wrote about the concept of wage slavery over a century ago and it makes good reading to this day.

"But in reality the abolition of serfdom and of [chattel] slavery was only the abolition of an obsolete form of slavery that had become unnecessary, and the substitution for it of a firmer form of slavery and one that holds a greater number of people in bondage."

- Leo Tolstoy

A few typos, but otherwise a fine summary: Tolstoy, Slavery of Our Times, Chap 8, 11 July, 1900 http://ebooks.gutenberg.us/WorldeBookLibrary.com/slaverytol.htm#1_0_7

The ruling class gives us war and welfare. Solidarity is the only effective defense against concentrated wealth. Absent solidarity the working class is a one legged man in an ass kicking contest. Witness the American prole. Simultaneously under the lash and at each others throats.

All true, except the part about solidarity, which would definitely be a huge step in the right direction for us proles and peasants, but is probably as unobtainable as true education of the masses.

As I see it, the best an individual can do is to toss a monkey wrench into the system whenever we can get away with it, but that requires an understanding of who are enemies are and that seems nearly impossible to achieve. Thus it's effective only in theory. In practice, it's probably as ephemeral as a gas emission in a tornado.

anonymous > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 12:31 pm GMT

@Beckow

Short of that, we will have chaos, and not the fun type of chaos.

Chaos is on the march.

It appears the minority has magically organized itself and planned a 10-day march from Charlottesville to DC, there to demand the impeachment/removal of Donald Trump, and to carry on a non-violent occupation (irony alert).

http://thehill.com/homenews/news/348136-ten-day-march-from-charlottesville-to-dc-to-start-monday

anonymous > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 12:35 pm GMT

@unpc downunder

then its essential to provide a more a la carte form of democracy that is less open to elite manipulation.

you mean something like state's sovereignty, which is what Robert E Lee stood for?

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 12:35 pm GMT

@jilles dykstra

Manipulated majorities are an even greater danger.

An even bigger threat is the manipulat ing minorities aka certain (most?) elements of the money bag crowd.

This problem has been recognized for millennia and was discussed in detail by many early Americans who nevertheless argued in favor of a constitution and a centralized bureaucracy that favored the rich.

Virtue cannot dwell with wealth either in a city or in a house.

-Diogenes of Sinope, quoted by Stobaeus, iv. 31c. 88

But if you will take note of the mode of proceedings of men, you will see that all those who come to great riches and great power have obtained them either by fraud or by force; and afterwards, to hide the ugliness of acquisition, they make it decent by applying the false title of earnings to things they have usurped by deceit or by violence.

- Niccolo Machiavelli , HISTORY OF FLORENCE AND OF THE AFFAIRS OF ITALY, Book 3 chap 3Para 8

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/2464/2464-h/2464-h.htm#link2H_4_0022

" wealth is no proof of moral character; nor poverty of the want of it. On the contrary, wealth is often the presumptive evidence of dishonesty; and poverty the negative evidence of innocence."

THOMAS PAINE, DISSERTATION ON FIRST-PRINCIPLES OF GOVERNMENT, 1795

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/ecco/004809392.0001.000/1:2?rgn=div1;view=fulltext

Robert Magill > , August 27, 2017 at 1:26 pm GMT

AfroAmericans who are descended from slaves should take into account the fact that their ancestors were protected because they had value. As a result they now number some 42 million and produced the last President. Comparison with the indigenous natives who after centuries of genocide number about 2 million and are mostly on reservations should give pause.

https://robertmagill.wordpress.com/2017/08/26/issues-seen-and-not-seen/

War for Blair Mountain > , August 27, 2017 at 2:27 pm GMT

Dear Saker

Nonwhites within the borders of the US are not innocent bystanders They are enthusiastically voting The Historic Native Born White American Majority into a violently persecuted racial minority within the borders of America..

If you have a greater identification with Muslim "Americans" and Hindu "Americans" than European American Natives then just go back to Russia..and take the Hindus and Muslims with you.

It wasn't very nice of you not to let my comment go through yesterday in response to commenter Eric .on The Vineyard of the Saker

You are waging demographic warfare against my Racial Tribe .

Intelligent Dasein > , Website August 27, 2017 at 2:33 pm GMT

@Robert Magill Barack Obama was not the descendant of any African slaves, you idiot.

War for Blair Mountain > , August 27, 2017 at 2:38 pm GMT

@WorkingClass The Chinese in California are Chinese Race Nationalist The Hindus in California are Hindu Race Nationalists You are a Civic Nationalist Cuck.

Michael Kenny > , August 27, 2017 at 2:42 pm GMT

Using minorities as an excuse to oppress majorities is a classic colonial technique. The British set themselves up as the "protectors" of the Muslims in India, the Turks in Cyprus and the Protestants in Ireland, for example. Putin justifies his actions in Ukraine by claiming that he is "protecting" the ethnic Russian minority from the dastardly ethnic Ukrainian majority. Ditto for the various cyber-attacks on Estonia. One assumes that the same treatment would be meted out to the Belarusians if they dared to assert their national sovereignty. The US captive nations legislation the author refers to includes Belarus (designated "White Ruthenia"), Ukraine and the three Baltic republics. I am unaware of any alliance ever having existed, or existing today, between Serbia and Russia. Like "Eurasia", that "alliance" seems to have been invented by US neocons when they were trying to use Putin as an "asset".

War for Blair Mountain > , August 27, 2017 at 2:45 pm GMT

Saker

Is it ok with you that the Chinese and Hindus in California voted The Historic Native Born White American Majority in California into a racial minority?

Anon > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 2:49 pm GMT

"Manipulated minorities represent a major danger to democratic states."

Well, yes. But the manipulation of minorities to change legal frameworks or disassemble governments has been ongoing since the French Revolution. 'They' first foster a sense of oppression, more or less justified, then move to grant the new rights. Monarchies suffered the strategy. Europe should know the drill, witness the received oral tradition "Czechoslovaquia is another spelling for Rothschild."

Breaking up the US along racial lines is exactly what 'they' want. They want the fighting "whites" to come out, give the reason for changes in law. The Trump impeachment is deliberate provocation.

There has never been a 'white nation', it is a silly, ahistorical idea. Nations are built around culture. Fight for the culture. Use the damn high IQ.

Intelligent Dasein > , Website August 27, 2017 at 3:03 pm GMT

@Michael Kenny

I am unaware of any alliance ever having existed, or existing today, between Serbia and Russia.

There was a little tiff called World War One. It was in a couple of papers.

Arithtoddle > , August 27, 2017 at 3:09 pm GMT

@Issac "White nationalism would have zero credibility if actual white leadership were transparently in control over the state."

Nope, but thanks for playing. White nationalism would have zero credibility if the leadership actually promoted American–WASP–interests. There is no escaping the Posterity clause, period. There is no magic dirt, no civic nationalism, no immersion in American culture, that can replace descendants of the English colonists that understand the importance of the Rights of Englishmen. The US was never intended to be the world's largest rest stop for every poor downtrodden person on Earth. Minorities now all undocumented immigrants since 1965 (Hart-Cellar).

Homogeneous nation's are born from Heterogeneous nation's. We are witnesses to the birth pains. The length of the labor depends on how long the majority will tolerate the minorities. Reconciliation isn't just impossible–its not even on the table, unless you reverse time. They. Have. To. Go. Back.

War for Blair Mountain > , August 27, 2017 at 3:21 pm GMT

@Anon Well..you are wrong about that..America since it's inception has always been a White Nation If you don't believe me..just ask Professor Noel Ignatieve-the Father of White Studies. Where I differ from Professor Noel Ignatieve:I think it's GREAT that America has historically been a White Nation as did Socialist Labor Leader Samuel Gompers.

As far as your last two sentences go:Bring back the 1888 Chinese Legal Immigrant Exclusion Act!!!!

Saker

The highly racialized Nonwhite Democratic Party Voting Bloc is the Voting Bloc for War on Christian Russia not Trump's Whitey Racist Voting Bloc..

Wally > , August 27, 2017 at 3:25 pm GMT

@jacques sheete Well stated.

And of course, what 'education' would these minorities be given?

Take a look at what is given them now in our systems.
Absolute lies about, and hatred of, white gentiles.

Then there is the simple fact of minorities low IQs.
What, we think we're going to train dumb Africans to be engineers?

By and large these people are unemployable in a modern society.

The entire matter of somehow 'educating' these people in the true sense of the word is laughable.
Just look at the countries they come from.

Francis G. > , August 27, 2017 at 5:07 pm GMT

@Intelligent Dasein Damned right. If anything, he is the descendant of African slave traders . But his skin is sort of black and he's got a funky name, so he can pass as one of the "oppressed" minorities.

WorkingClass > , August 27, 2017 at 5:08 pm GMT

@jacques sheete 1 Timothy 5:18 ESV /
For the Scripture says, "You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain," and, "The laborer deserves his wages."

Wages are as old as dirt. I can understand why you find them objectionable. But with what will you replace them?

There's a huge difference between making (earning) a living and holding a job for wages, but I doubt I'll ever be able to convince anyone of that.

Try me.

I was a union man back in the day when private sector unions were active and had support in Washington. We had a contractual relationship with employers that was qualitatively different from serfdom or chattel slavery and a huge improvement over the wage slavery that prevailed before the American labor movement.

As ideologies go the Anarchists have the best of it. But even they are Utopians. Capitalism sux. There will never be a free market utopia. But neither will there be a workers paradise. Human beings are limited in what they can accomplish by human nature. That's the law. I'm only interested in what works in the real world, however imperfectly.

anonymous > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 5:13 pm GMT

Who said this:

Nature does not know political frontiers. She first puts the living beings on this globe and watches the free game of energies. He who is strongest in courage and industry receives, as her favorite child, the right to be the master of existence.

If a people limits itself to domestic colonization, at a time when other races cling to greater and greater surfaces of the earth's soil, it will be forced to exercise self-restriction even while other nations will continue to increase.

For some day this case will occur, and it will arrive the earlier the smaller the living space is that a people has at its disposal. As, unfortunately only too frequently, the best nations, or, better still, the really unique cultured races, the pillars of all human progress, in their pacifistic blindness decide to renounce the acquisition of new soil in order to content themselves with 'domestic* colonization, while
inferior nations know full well how to secure enormous areas on this earth for themselves, this would lead to the following result:

The culturally superior, but less ruthless, races would have to limit, in consequence of their limited soil, their increase even at a time when the culturally inferior, but more brutal and more natural, people, in consequence of their greater living areas, would be able to increase themselves without limit.

In other words: the world will, therefore, some day come into the hands of a mankind that is
inferior in culture but superior in energy and activity.

For then there will be only two possibilities in the no matter how distant future: either the world will be ruled according to the ideas of our modern democracy, and then the stress of every decision falls on the races which are stronger in numbers, or the world will be dominated according to the law of the natural order of energy, and then the people of brute strength will be victorious, and again, therefore, not the nations of self-restriction.

But one may well believe that this world will still be subject to the fiercest fights for the existence of mankind.
In the end, only the urge for self-preservation will eternally succeed. Under its pressure so-called 'humanity,' as the expression of a mixture of stupidity, cowardice, and an imaginary superior intelligence, will melt like snow under the March sun. Mankind has grown strong in eternal
struggles and it will only perish through eternal peace.

Hint: today in an appearance on an internationally broadcast program, a minion from Foundation for Defense of Democracy (FDD) dismissed as "conspiracy theory" the suggestion that the USA/(Trump admin) is involved in Afghanistan "because Afghanistan has vast lithium resources, which US needs for new technologies" [see this 2010 report, Read More

Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
yeah > , August 27, 2017 at 5:18 pm GMT

Minorities are nothing but trouble, even though political correctness demands that we not see that or dare to say so. History offers not a single – NOT ONE SINGLE – example of harmony and mutual love between the minorities and the majority in any community/country/nation. Prove me wrong, cite one significant exception.

Don't cite Italian-Americans and Polish-Americans in the American melting pot. They came with full intent to be melted, they came white, Christian, and western in outlook and culture. They came pre-cooked for the melting pot. Can't say the same for the Muslims streaming in today. Nor for the Hindus and the Orientals coming in today. Leaving aside the Muslims (not even worth discussing in any talk of assimilation), the Hindus and Orientals today stand aside and apart, both groups highly conscious of their groups' share in the American pie. The Hispanics will make Spanish the lingua Franca – already largely done in California. So what exactly can the melting of Spanish and English languages produce? Spanglish? No, it will be one or the other, depending on which group acquires demographic majority and sufficient political clout. Who will melt whom?

WorkingClass > , August 27, 2017 at 5:40 pm GMT

@Fran Macadam Unless a million guys are organized.

Cloak And Dagger > , August 27, 2017 at 6:00 pm GMT

@War for Blair Mountain

Is it ok with you that the Chinese and Hindus in California voted The Historic Native Born White American Majority in California into a racial minority?

Please elaborate on what you mean. I definitely do not see myself as a racial minority in California.

Art > , August 27, 2017 at 6:43 pm GMT

Manipulated Minorities Represent a Major Danger for Democratic States

The solution is an easy one – we must abandon the Jew Matrix of identity politics and return to the Christian Matrix of neighborliness.

Jew thought is about biological identity, and all the fear and hate associated with it – the Christian philosophical mindset is an intellectual entreaty to "love your neighbor as you love yourself." Hmm – one favors gonad driven actions – the other using our brains to overcome our biology, and make peace and abundance.

The differences are stark and profound – we can see what the Jew way has brought us – Jew tribalism is killing America and the West.

If we want a just kind world we cannot abandon philosophical Christianity.

Philosophical Christianity is not about "the virgin birth" and "the ascension into heaven" – it is about a practical way to peaceably live with each other and build an abundance for all.

Think Peace -- Art

nsa > , August 27, 2017 at 6:43 pm GMT

@Cloak And Dagger Non-Hispanic white is now down to 37.7% of the California population as of 2016 according to the U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts ..probably less if you include all the uncounted illegals.

Ivy > , August 27, 2017 at 7:22 pm GMT

@nsa Will the increased supply of labor result in lower gardening bills? Or take-out food bills?

Logan > , August 27, 2017 at 7:29 pm GMT

"I would even argue that the Empire has created several nation ex nihilo (What in the world is a "Belarussian"?!)."

Hey, us Anglo-Zionists didn't create Belarus. That was an indigenous or possibly German puppet state created (sort of) in early 1918. It was then conquered by the Bolsheviks and reborn as the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, a constituent republic of the USSR till it fell apart, at which point it became (sort of) independent.

The Anglo-Zionists had nothing to do with any of this, with probable exception of the collapse of the USSR.

Logan > , August 27, 2017 at 7:33 pm GMT

@jacques sheete Since you consider "working for wages" as not "making a living," I'm curious what you would consider to constitute "making a living."

Yeoman farmer?

Small businessman?

Bank robber?

Logan > , August 27, 2017 at 7:37 pm GMT

@Intelligent Dasein Actually, if we go back a dozen or two generations, it's probable most people on the planet are descended from both slaveowners and slaves. Especially if you're a little loose with the definition of slave.

Logan > , August 27, 2017 at 7:44 pm GMT

@Bragadocious If we had ever made a serious consistent effort to kill all the Indians, they'd be gone. But there seem to be quite a few of them still around. About 5M, in fact, considerably more than lived in the boundaries of the USA in 1491.

Argentina had similar Indian problems during the same time period (late 19th century) we were fighting our final Indian wars. But they had a different approach: extermination.

Quite successful at it, too. Very few Indians left in Argentina. And they didn't import any other minorities, which means Argentina is now upwards of 90% "white." Much more so than USA, in fact.

Miro23 > , August 27, 2017 at 8:27 pm GMT

If we accept that minorities are typically much more driven than most of the population, then we also immediately can see why their influence over society is often out of proportion with the numerical demographical "weight". This has nothing to do with these minorities being more intelligent or more creative and everything to do with them willing to being spend much more time and efforts towards their objectives than most people.

It's true that there is greater activism, but the key ingredient is probably ethnic patronage.

A.H. gave an (approving) explanation of how it works:

"In the old Austria, nothing could be done without patronage. That's partly explained by the fact that nine million Germans were in fact rulers, in virtue of an unwritten law, of fifty million non-Germans. This German ruling class took strict care that places should always be found for Germans. For them this was the only method of maintaining themselves in this privileged situation. The Balts of German origin behaved in the same way towards the Slav population."

Hitler's Table Talk. Conversation Nº 109, 15th-16th January 1942

American Jewry has been following the same policy since the early 1900′s, pushing for Jewish candidates in key placings, who if successful, are expected to return the favour. On a "level playing field" this has a ratchet effect whereby corporate management and key media, finance and government positions can be gradually taken over with Anglos squeezed out in a rather unobvious way ("He wasn't the right candidate for reasons A,B,C X,Y,Z").

prusmc > , August 27, 2017 at 8:34 pm GMT

@jacques sheete Jacquez:

Educate the minorities! I have bwen hearing that for over 50 years. I believe that was a substantial rationale for Federal Aid to education. How has it worked? What does the US Census data show for the indicator median education level persons over 25 years of age in 1960 demonstrate when compared to 2010? Compare for both white and black. Wow! we all are much smarter. Okay, as Rodney King so aptly stated it "why can' t everbody just get along?"

Tradecraft46 > , August 27, 2017 at 8:40 pm GMT

Better still, they are making more enemies than they can put to any good use.

In that world, enemies validate, in the real world, it invites total destruction.

None of them, being religious and all, never count the costs, which Jesus suggested.

Lawrence Fitton > , August 27, 2017 at 8:52 pm GMT

@Wally okay wally, i'm only going to say this once, so please pay attention. the gas chambers were but one method by which jews were killed. starvation, disease, forced labor, firing squads, killed legions. what if it was only 4 million jews who perished in the camps? or 3? does that make it better.
one last thing: elie wiesel is not the wonderful man he is purported to be.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 8:59 pm GMT

@WorkingClass

Wages are as old as dirt. I can understand why you find them objectionable. But with what will you replace them?

Dear Sir, as I've often stated, I like what you have to say and agree with 99% of it. I also respect the fact that your reply to me was obviously respectful and sincere.

My usual answer to your question is to replace them with nothing. For example if I had a case of the gleet, I'd rather not replace it; I'd rather do without. Instead of wages and a time clock, I advocate finding other (hopefully respectable) sources of income.

I realize that in this environment, it's nearly impossible to do without wages, but that shows how much our system sux, hence my objection to them and the system. I pretty much became disgusted with the concept after working at a few jobs that were really akin to slavery or some other unsavory paid profession, so I worked to make a living without punching time clock. That's not to say that I did not receive money for my services, but I managed to do without a direct boss during my earning days. Several other rather cantankerous members of my family manged to do the same, and some still do. I'm not saying that to brag, but to point out that it can be done.

I do admit that it now seems nearly impossible to do that sort of thing, but a close neighbor, in his thirty's, manages to do that and does quite well. He does have the advantage of both a good work ethic and access to a family business though.

The bottom line for me is that it's too bad that we have to submit to bosses for the most part to earn a living. From that we seem to learn to submit to other forms of "authority" with little or no questioning, and it seems to be a downhill slide from there. Also, the more power the bosses get, they more they control, and the less chance there is for people to become independent. that's no way to live.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 9:09 pm GMT

@Logan

Since you consider "working for wages" as not "making a living,"

That is a false statement. It is both illogical and unreasonable based on what I actually said.

Working for wages in one of several ways of earning a living. It just happens to be, in my way of thinking, one of the least desirable for many reasons.

I'm curious what you would consider to constitute "making a living."

Yeoman farmer?

Small businessman?

Bank robber?

All of the above, and many more.

Skeptikal > , August 27, 2017 at 9:12 pm GMT

@Logan Belorusian.
One r.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 9:14 pm GMT

@prusmc

Educate the minorities! I have bwen hearing that for over 50 years. I believe that was a substantial rationale for Federal Aid to education.

Most folks are entirely ineducable and seem to like it that way. Of course, it's a fine sounding pretext for mass brainwashing and it's attendant bureaucracy and source of profits.

How has it worked?

It's probably worked just as intended but not at all as advertised!

See John Taylor Gatto and Upton Sinclair's "The Goslings" and the Goosestep" which basically describe schooling in America as a tool for corporations.

Tim Howells > , August 27, 2017 at 9:23 pm GMT

@Lawrence Fitton

what if it was only 4 million jews who perished in the camps? or 3? does that make it better?

Well, in several countries you can go to jail, and many have, for saying it was less than 6, so go figure. Norman Finkelstein was destroyed by the "Holocaust Industry" for showing in the simplest terms that if you add up the numbers of supposed "victims" and "survivors", the official figures are patently absurd. The more you dig, the more absurd it gets.

attilathehen > , August 27, 2017 at 9:59 pm GMT

The Saker: You are not a "minority." You are a Caucasian, the European branch, ethnically Russian. You are Christian, specifically Orthodox. You are one of the interesting groups that make up the Caucasian peoples. You have nothing in common with blacks/Asians.

The Democratic party is the party of nonwhites, non-Christians, sexual degenerates. Manipulation has nothing to do with this. Minorities know they are inferiors. What they are doing is because they realize they can never accomplish what Caucasians/Europeans/ Christians/neopagans have accomplished. This means it is time for separation/deportation/repatriation.

This is coming. An RCC priest "confessed" to having been in the KKK when he was a teenager. The US Conference of Bishops has established an ad hoc committee to address racism. This is the final nail in the coffin of the RCC. Homosexuals have taken over the priesthood. Priests do not preach about hell, sin, repentance. Now that this KKK priest has been exposed, from now on sermons will only cover "racism," the worst sin.

Caucasian Christans/pagans have to deal with the reality that world history can be summed up in two words: IQ, which is tied to race. The past 2000 years of Western civilization united under the RCC are gone. There has to be a new paradigm shift to deal with the future and what needs to be done.

Delinquent Snail > , August 27, 2017 at 10:13 pm GMT

@anonymous I hope they act like they have at every event they have been a part of and the president acts accordingly. Trump needs to hire people to record the whole thing and put it all up on a new website thats created just to host the event. Dozens of live feeds from dozens of angles. All put up on this new website just so there will be no confusion. Once the left riots, because they will riot, National guard needs to be called and these domestic terrorists need to be put down. He then needs to put out an executive order to shut down all propaganda news agencies that are spinning this, and if people want to see what happened, view the live feeds from dozens of angles on the newly created website. And if people bitch about how its wrong to have this up, fuck them. Its time to take off the kiddy gloves.

Mulegino1 > , August 27, 2017 at 10:24 pm GMT

@Tim Howells It was more like around 300,000 in all of the German camps since their inception back in the mid-1930′s, according to the International Red Cross. And that refers to all camp inmates of all ethnic backgrounds.

It is entirely possible that many Jews may have been killed on the Eastern Front or in the Soviet Union, but that can hardly be blamed solely upon the Germans, who were not known to be savagely cruel or vengeful- even though the anti-partisan actions may have led to some excesses.

In any case, there is zero evidence for "millions of Jews" killed by the Germans. There are no mass graves commensurate with such figures, nor is there any documentary evidence of a deliberate plan of "extermination."

WorkingClass > , August 27, 2017 at 10:25 pm GMT

@jacques sheete I understand you quite well I think. I have worked on commission. I have been self employed. For a time I was a soldier. I have worked for wages for mom and pop business and for large corporations and held both union and non union jobs. I did a few years working for a not for profit homeless shelter. I am a Jack of all trades and (unfortunately) master of none.

On union jobs (IBEW and Teamsters) I had the great benefit of having a contract with my employer that spelled out the duties and privileges of both the worker and the company. This meant that both labor and management worked from the same set of rules. The path to promotion was defined as was the possible cause for termination. Personalities had nothing to do with anything. The boss and I followed the same rules. It was nothing like being subject to the whims and prejudices of one man.

" For example if I had a case of the gleet, I'd rather not replace it; I'd rather do without."

Having a "job" can be worse than the gleet.
Unfortunately a mans gotta eat.

Thanks for coming back.

nsa > , August 27, 2017 at 10:29 pm GMT

@Ivy The white trash (as of 2016, down to 37.7% of California's population) has simply been replaced by brown trash in California. The only question remaining is which ethnic elite will run the state ..the jooies or the chinkies or the hindus. Or will the ethnics simply rule via a de facto coalition? Whitey's demise in CA is an accomplished fact ..with AZ and TX soon to follow and eventually OR, WA, ID, and CO. The efforts of James K. Polk are soon to be fully reversed. And yes, Ivy, you will have employment ..every Chinese has been promised a white house boy and white concubine by 2050.

Ivy > , August 27, 2017 at 10:49 pm GMT

@nsa I'll be long dead by 2050 but will miss those Chinese masseuses.

Cloak And Dagger > , August 27, 2017 at 10:51 pm GMT

@Lawrence Fitton

the gas chambers were but one method by which jews were killed

There is much contention as to whether even a single jew was killed in a gas chamber. Asserting that statement can land you in jail in much of Europe.

anonymous > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 11:15 pm GMT

@Logan Chaim Weizmann, who obtained the Balfour Declaration from the British, and went on to become first president of Israel, hailed from Belarus.

hunor > , August 27, 2017 at 11:22 pm GMT

the same tolerant technology has been applied five thousand years ago in the Sumerian civilization
what was a non semitic composed society. Few hundred years prior to the destruction of that culture
semitic tribes were allowed to settle in, first in smaller numbers , then in the name of tolerance larger migrating groups were allowed , and enjoyed benefits of education, comfortable, cultured living. The original majority of the population were builders and workers , the migrants for the most part were users, who's interest were to find an easy way to become the more. The complete opposite of mentality. In time the semitic migrants were able to build up a fifth column , moved in to powerful positions such as religion and astrology , and from then on destruction has begun. The original populous were pushed out, part of them were forcefully crossbred , the rest of them flee and
build new countries in Europa . The migrants of that time gained written culture , tailored clothing ,
the benefit of toilet so not to go to the bushes to relieve themselves . This time around there is no place left to flee.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 11:25 pm GMT

@WorkingClass I, too, think I understand from whence you come.

I agree with the concept of labor unions but recognize that they too can be turned against the interests of the workers, and unfortunately, have been.

I do applaud you for your success working within the system and I have no doubt that you did it as a sincere, able and good man. I also respect your views and thank you for sharing them.

As for bosses, I loathe them so much that I myself never hired employees because I didn't want to be a boss any more than I wanted to answer to one. I almost get physically sick when I see that the window of opportunity for youngsters to follow a independent lifestyle is next to nil and getting tougher all the time.

I do still counsel my younger relatives to acquire as much experience as they can so that they are in a position to have some control over their own lives. I'm also actively involved in fortifying my grandkids with both defiance and the attitudes and skills to back it up.

Is that attitude Utopian? No doubt to some degree it is, but so is the attitude of submission, i.e., the wish for everything to be taken care of so long as one submits.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 11:34 pm GMT

@Cloak And Dagger

There is much contention as to whether even a single jew was killed in a gas chamber.

Not only is there much contention, but there is no credible evidence that it really happened. Besides, the numbers are farcical.

Where do they get 6 million?

"Allowing for a maximum of 100,000 who succeeded in emigrating from Europe, this would bring the total number of Jews under the direct rule of Nazi Germany to about 3,200,000."

Distribution of the Jewish Population of Europe 1933-. 1940," prepared by Mr. Moses Moskowitz
AMERICAN JEWISH YEAR BOOK 1941-1942, page 662

http://www.ajcarchives.org/AJC_DATA/Files/1941_1942_9_Statistics.pdf

I haven't checked in a while, but I wonder if the link is still active

Jake > , August 27, 2017 at 11:43 pm GMT

"I submit that the real truth is totally different. My thesis is very simple: the reason why the US always support foreign minorities to subvert states and use domestic minorities to suppress the majority US population is because minorities are very easy to manipulate and because minorities present no threat to the real rulers of the AngloZionist Empire. That's all there is to it."

That is pretty much it, save for the origins. WASP culture's Germanic basis began by hating the native British Isles. That set the pattern:WASPs most hate those from whom they steal or otherwise wrong gravely. The Reformation provided the perfect theological and philosophical justifications for that pattern to become something much greater.

The Anglo-Saxon Puritans were Judaizing heretics. You cannot over-emphasize that point. WASAP culture from the moment it was crystalized, truly formed, was one that saw the world through Jewish-influenced, Jewish-fawning, eyes. Naturally and inevitably, once the true WASPs gained total control of the government, with the Puritan Revolution, their fearless leader, Oliver Cromwell, allied with Jews. He took Jewish money to wage war, to exterminate cultures and make at least virtual serfs of whole populations.

White Christian populations.

WASP culture began with an alliance with Jews, allowing Jews back into England, with special rights and privileges that the vast majority of British Isles native Christians did not have, that allowed the WASPs to continue waging war to exterminate white Christian cultures.

When WASPs encountered non-whites, they began to grasp the value of using them – non-whites and non-Christians – as tools and weapons with which to batter the white Christians they wished to destroy.

That is the reason the 'Anglo-Zionist Empire' uses minorities as it does.

You cannot separate the Jewish Problem from the WASP Problem. You cannot solve the Jewish Problem without solving the 'WASP Problem.

[Mar 03, 2017] The Brothers John Foster Dulles, Allen Dulles, and Their Secret World War by Stephen Kinzer

Notable quotes:
"... Allen Dulles masterminded the coup that turned Iranian prime minister Mohammad Mossadegh out of office and installed the Shah on the Peacock Throne. Less than a year later he presided over the operation that ousted Guatemalan president Jacobo Arbenz. He set in motion plots to assassinate Gamal Abdel Nasser in Egypt, Sukarno in Indonesia, Ho Chi Minh in Vietnam, Patrice Lumumba in the Congo, and Fidel Castro in Cuba. He delegated to his deputy, Richard Bissell, leadership of the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba. ..."
"... Corporate greed is not new but for members of the US Congress and the Administartion to support corporate interests over Americans safety and put money ahead of the protection of the people of our country as well as the people of other nations is a violation of our US Constitution and these people should not be immune from prosecution. G.W. Bush destroyed the infrastructure of an entire country and he killed hundreds of thousand of innocent citizens just so Brown & Root and Halliburton, V.P. Cheney's company, could receive billions of dollars of US taxpayer monies to rebuild the very infrastructure that Bush destroyed that provided the life support for the people of Iraq. ..."
"... George W. Bush asked the question after 9/11-- "Why do they hate us?" The answer he came up with was, "Because of our Freedoms." When you read this book, you come face to face for the real reasons THEY (most of the rest of the world) hate us. It's because these Bush's "freedoms" are only for the United States, no other non-white, non-Christian, non-corporate cultures need apply. ..."
"... The missionary Christian, Corporatism of the Dulles Brothers--John, the former head of the largest corporate law firm in the world, then Secretary of State, and his brother Allen, the head of the CIA all the way from Korea through Vietnam -- constitutes the true behavioral DNA of America-in-the-world. It's enough to make you weep for the billions of people this country has deprived of freedom and security for the last sixty years. ..."
"... This book is, in fact, a MUST READ... for anyone who wants to know what their taxes have paid for in the last half century--for anyone who wants to know just exactly why the rest of the world wants either to attack us or throw us out of their countries. And a must read for anyone who no longer wishes their "representatives" in Washington to keep facilitating the stealing and killing all over the world and call it American Exceptionalism. ..."
"... Foster promptly works on a policy of "rollback" to replace the "containment" policy of Truman and Kennan. ..."
"... The 1953 coup of democratically elected Mohammed Mosaddegh in Iran was similar in the sense that it was made more urgent by Mosaddegh's nationalization of British oil interests after the Brits refused to let Mosaddegh audit their books or negotiate a better deal. ..."
"... Kinzer writes that Foster saw a danger in a country like Iran becoming prosperous and inspiring others toward neutrality that might result in eventual creep toward the USSR, hence he and others like him had to be eliminated. How much the coup was driven to help the UK is unknown. The blowback from intervention in South America and Iran has since come back to haunt the US in the form of skepticism and greater Leftist angst against the US and the 1979 overthrow of the Shah. ..."
"... This type of neutrality was against the Dulles' worldview, and in his memoir, Sukarno lamented "America, why couldn't you be my friend?" after the CIA spent a lot of manpower trying to topple his regime in 1958. There was also the training of Tibetan rebels in Colorado in 1957 and the ongoing plot to assassinate Congo's Lumumba, given with Ike's consent. ..."
"... Allen Dulles' reign at CIA reads like the nightmare everyone worried about "big government" warns you about. Experiments interrogating prisoners with LSD, the purchase to the movie rights of books like The Quiet American in order to sanitize them, planting stories in major newspapers, planting false documents in Joseph McCarthy's office to discredit him, along with the private armies and escapades. Dulles comes under official criticism by Doolittle, who wrote that he was a bad administrator, bad for morale, and had no accountability-- all of which was dismissed by Eisenhower who saw Allen as the indispensible man. ..."
"... When Castro seizes power in Cuba, the Eisenhower Administration made it official policy to depose him. ..."
"... Dulles' last act was on the Warren Commission investigating JFK's assassination. This was problematic because Dulles' goal was to keep CIA assassination operations in Cuba a secret. Kinzer writes of Lyndon Johnson's desire to make Oswald a lone gunman with no political attachments, which brings us to a whole other story. ..."
"... I was surprised that President Eisenhower, whose administration is commonly thought to be one of tranquility, approved toppling governments and assassinating leaders. In some ways, he was the front man, for instance urging Congress to approve funds for "maintenance of national independence" but really for fomenting a coup in Syria and installing a king in Saudi Arabia to get US friendly governments to oppose Gamal Nasser (p. 225). ..."
"... the story of these two scions of an American aristocratic family, who were fully steeped in Calvinistic Protestantism (and it's capitalist ethic) and unquestioningly convinced of American Exceptionalism and it's Manifest Destiny to lead the world and make it safe for democracy and American Business ..."
"... It is an exposition of the quintessential, archetypical American (WASP) mindset, worldview or psychology that has motivated our collective international behavior over the past six or seven decades. ..."
"... All State employees that don't hew the line are regularly fired or transferred to obscure jobs or roles and in place are pro-CIA hardliners. ..."
"... There is much here that further condemns Eisenhower. In many cases he fully supported and endorsed their plans while pretending not to, fully employing the most cynical of strategies; "plausible deniability". ..."
"... Having read the 2012 Eisenhower biography by Jean Edward Smith I was surprised here by the wealth of information that ties Eisenhower more directly to clandestine activities and their purposes. Particularly disappointing is his continues build up for the Bay of Pigs invasion in Cuba after Kennedy's election but before he took office and will little effort to brief the incoming president. Similarly our Vietnam involvement in the 1950's was so deep already as to make a Kennedy pullout far more difficult. ..."
"... There is much here about these issues and the corrupt relationships between the Dulles's prior careers at Sullivan and Cromwell and their support of private interests while working at State and the CIA. ..."
"... At the heart of the story is the unfortunate belief by the brothers that if a country was not totally in agreement with American philosophy they were against us. Any nationalist leaders of a former colonial nation that believed in land reform or neutrality on the international scene had to be evil and must be destroyed. If they were not with us, they had to be communist. This American foreign policy changed the history of the Middle East, Southeast Asia, Africa and Central America. ..."
"... Its interesting to note that Kinzer asserts that on the death of Chief Justice Fred Vinson in 1953, Eisenhower offered the position of Chief Justice to John Foster Dulles. According to Kinzer, Dulles turned it down because he wanted to stay at the State Department. The story has always been that Ike had promised Earl Warren the first seat on the Supreme Court in exchange for his support in the 1952 election - Warren had been out maneuvered by Richard Nixon to get the bid for the vice presidency. How different legal history would have been had John Foster Dulles become Chief Justice! ..."
"... Author Stephen Kinzer explores the unique situation in which the intelligence gathering agency is also an actor. Throughout he illustrates how the relationship of their leaders enabled two agencies that would normally question and check each other, to work in seamless harmony to carry out the covert operations that both saw as primary instruments of American power. Behind them was President Eisenhower who had used covert operations during World War II and who approved their actions. In the end the author posits that the policies were the President's and the brothers were more his servants than his masters. ..."
Amazon.com

Mal Warwickon July 21, 2014

They shaped US foreign policy for decades to come

One of them was the most powerful US Secretary of State in modern times. The other built the CIA into a fearsome engine of covert war. Together, they shaped US foreign policy in the 1950s, with tragic consequences that came to light in the decades that followed. These were the Dulles brothers, Foster and Allen, born and reared in privilege, nephews of one Secretary of State and grandsons of another.

What they did in office

Allen Dulles masterminded the coup that turned Iranian prime minister Mohammad Mossadegh out of office and installed the Shah on the Peacock Throne. Less than a year later he presided over the operation that ousted Guatemalan president Jacobo Arbenz. He set in motion plots to assassinate Gamal Abdel Nasser in Egypt, Sukarno in Indonesia, Ho Chi Minh in Vietnam, Patrice Lumumba in the Congo, and Fidel Castro in Cuba. He delegated to his deputy, Richard Bissell, leadership of the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba. Later, out of office, he chaired the Warren Commission on the assassination of John F. Kennedy. "'From the start, before any evidence was reviewed, he pressed for the final verdict that Oswald had been a crazed gunman, not the agent of a national and international conspiracy.'"

Foster Dulles repeatedly replaced US ambassadors who resisted his brother's assassination plots in countries where they served. Pathologically fearful of Communism, he publicly snubbed Chinese foreign minister Chou En-Lai, exacerbating the already dangerous tension between our two countries following the Korean War. The active role he took in preventing Ho Chi Minh's election to lead a united Vietnam led inexorably to the protracted and costly US war there. He reflexively rejected peace feelers from the Soviet leaders who succeeded Josef Stalin, intensifying and prolonging the Cold War. Earlier in life, working as the managing partner of Sullivan & Cromwell, the leading US corporate law firm, Foster had engineered many of the corporate loans that made possible Adolf Hitler's rise to power and the growth of his war machine.

What does it mean now?

At half a century's remove from the reign of the formidable Dulles brothers, with critical documents finally coming into the light of day, we can begin to assess their true impact on US history and shake our heads in dismay. However, during their time in office that spanned the eight years of Dwight Eisenhower's presidency and, in Allen's case, extended into Kennedy's, little was known to the public about about Allen's activities (or the CIA itself, for that matter), and Foster's unimaginative and belligerent performance at State was simply seen as a fair expression of the national mood, reflecting the fear that permeated the country during the most dangerous years of the Cold War.

Diving deeply into recently unclassified documents and other contemporaneous primary sources, Stephen Kinzer, author of The Brothers, has produced a masterful assessment of the roles played at the highest levels of world leadership by these two very dissimilar men. Kinzer is respectful throughout, but, having gained enough information to evaluate the brothers' performance against even their own stated goals, he can find little good to say other than that they "exemplified the nation that produced them. A different kind of leader would require a different kind of United States."

Their unique leadership styles

To understand Foster's style of leadership, consider the assessments offered by his contemporaries: Winston Churchill said "'Foster Dulles is the only case I know of a bull who carries his own china shop around with him.'"

Celebrated New York Times columnist James Reston "wrote that [Foster] had become a 'supreme expert' in the art of diplomatic blundering. 'He doesn't just stumble into booby traps. He digs them to size, studies them carefully, and then jumps.'"

Senator William Fulbright, chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said Foster "misleads public opinion, confuses it, [and] feeds it pap." "A foreign ambassador once asked Foster how he knew that the Soviets were tied to land reform in Guatemala. He admitted that it was 'impossible to produce evidence' but said evidence was unnecessary because of 'our deep conviction that such a tie must exist.'" (Sounds similar to the attitude of a certain 21st-century President, doesn't it?)

Allen, too, comes up very, very short: "He was not the brilliant spymaster many believed him to be. In fact, the opposite is true. Nearly every one of his major covert operations failed or nearly failed . . . [Moreover,] under Allen's lackadaisical leadership, the agency endlessly tolerated misfits." He left the CIA riddled with "lazy, alcoholic, or simply incompetent" employees.

Stephen Kinzer was for many years a foreign correspondent for the New York Times, reporting from more than fifty countries. The Brothers is his eighth nonfiction book. It's brilliant.

W. J. Haufon June 27, 2014

Without John Foster Dulles There Would Have Been No Hitler and No Nazi Germany!

After the Treaty of Versailles mandated the imposition of incredibly severe monetary reparations on Germany, John Foster Dulles in the 1930s, as a partner in his law firm of Sullivan and Cromwell, assembled a coalition of banks to lend Germany over $1 trillion, (in today's dollars), supposedly for them to pay these reparations. Had Foster not organized these massive bank loans to Hitler's Germany and organized the sale of raw materials such as cobalt to fabricate armor plating to build Germany's war machine, there would have been no Nazi war machine or an Adolf Hitler to kill millions of Americans, ally troops and civilians in a war that would have never happened.

As a reward our government appointed John Foster Dulles as Secretary of State so he could continue his war against democracy by orchestrating the overthrow of democratically elected leaders such as the Prime Minister of Iran to restore the Shah, and then continuing his reign of terror against other democratically elected governments such the CIA overthrow of the President of Guatemala in 1954 by his brother Allen, Director of the CIA, and installing a US controlled puppet President so the United Fruit could continued its monopolistic hold on the banana industry in that country and eventually throughout Central and South America and the Caribbean.

Oh did I mention that JFD was a stockholder in United Fruit. Corporate greed is not new but for members of the US Congress and the Administartion to support corporate interests over Americans safety and put money ahead of the protection of the people of our country as well as the people of other nations is a violation of our US Constitution and these people should not be immune from prosecution. G.W. Bush destroyed the infrastructure of an entire country and he killed hundreds of thousand of innocent citizens just so Brown & Root and Halliburton, V.P. Cheney's company, could receive billions of dollars of US taxpayer monies to rebuild the very infrastructure that Bush destroyed that provided the life support for the people of Iraq.

Our Founding Fathers would never had fought to build a country of democratic principals if they knew that the political representatives in this country would worship money and support corporate greed over American human rights and freedoms.

G.W. Bush said that the attacks on 9-11 were because "they hate our freedoms". What a disgrace for a President to lie and not say it was because we have been interfering and overthrowing democratically elected governments for decades. Shame on you Mr. Bush, but you will meet your Maker one day and you can explain why you killed so many people just so you and your friends could receive billions of dollars in profits. "May God Have Mercy on Your Very Soul"

Mike Feder/Sirius XM and PRN.FM Radio on October 11, 2013

Best Political/Historical Book in Years

You know those reviews clips, headlines or ads that say "Must Read" or, "...if you only read one book this year..."
I have to say, with all the books I've read before and am reading currently, this one is absolutely the most eye-opening, informative and provocative one I've come across in many years.

And--after all I've read about American politics and culture--after all the experts I've interviewed on my radio show... I shouldn't be shocked any more. But the scope of insanity, corruption and hypocrisy revealed in this history of the Dulles brothers is, in fact, truly shocking.

Just when you thought you knew just how bad the United States has been in the world, you come across a history like this and you suddenly become aware of the real depths to which "our" government has sunk in subverting decency, freedom and democracy all over the world.

George W. Bush asked the question after 9/11-- "Why do they hate us?" The answer he came up with was, "Because of our Freedoms." When you read this book, you come face to face for the real reasons THEY (most of the rest of the world) hate us. It's because these Bush's "freedoms" are only for the United States, no other non-white, non-Christian, non-corporate cultures need apply.

The missionary Christian, Corporatism of the Dulles Brothers--John, the former head of the largest corporate law firm in the world, then Secretary of State, and his brother Allen, the head of the CIA all the way from Korea through Vietnam -- constitutes the true behavioral DNA of America-in-the-world. It's enough to make you weep for the billions of people this country has deprived of freedom and security for the last sixty years.

I grew up practically in love with America and the Declaration of Independence. When I was a kid the USA had just beaten the Nazis. I saw the picture of the marines raising the flag at Iwo Jima. I knew men in my neighborhood that had liberated concentration camps.

But they never taught us the real history of America in high school and barely at all in college. If they had given us a clear picture of our true history, there never would have been a Vietnam in the first place--and no Iraq or Afghanistan either; Global Banks wouldn't have gotten away with stealing all our money and crashing our economy and Christian fundamentalist and corporate puppets wouldn't have taken over our government.

Karma is real. You can't steal a whole country, kill and enslave tens of millions of human beings, assassinate democratically elected leaders of countries, bribe and corrupt foreign governments, train the secret police and arm the military of dictators for decades-- You cannot do all this and escape the judgment and the punishment of history.

This book is, in fact, a MUST READ... for anyone who wants to know what their taxes have paid for in the last half century--for anyone who wants to know just exactly why the rest of the world wants either to attack us or throw us out of their countries. And a must read for anyone who no longer wishes their "representatives" in Washington to keep facilitating the stealing and killing all over the world and call it American Exceptionalism.

I'll also add that Stephen Kinzer is also a terrific writer; clear, articulate, factual and dramatic. His inside the inner circle revelations of the Dulles brothers and their crimes is morbidly page-turning.

Chris on October 11, 2013

The Dark-side of American foreign policy

The American people and the world at large still feel the reverberations from the policies and adventures of the Dulles' brothers. They are in part to blame for our difficult relations with both Cuba and Iran. This history helps answer the question, "Why do they hate us?" The answer isn't our freedom, it's because we try to topple their governments.

The Dulles brother grew up in a privileged, religious environment. They were taught to see the world in strictly black and white. Both were well-educated at Groton and the Ivy League schools. Both worked on and off in the government, but spent a significant amount of time at the immensely powerful law firm, Sullivan & Cromwell. They had virtually identical world views but nearly opposite personalities. (John) Foster was dour, awkward, and straight-laced. Allen was outgoing, talkative, and had loose morals.

There's no need for a blow-by-blow of their lives in this review. The core of the book revolves around Foster Dulles as the Secretary of State under Eisenhower and Allen as the Director of the CIA. The center of the book is divided into six parts, each one dealing with a specific foreign intervention: Mossaddegh of Iran, Arbenz of Guatemala, Ho Chi Minh of Vietnam, Lumumba of the Congo, Sukarno of Indonesia and Castro of Cuba.

The Dulles view was that you were either behind the US 110% or a communist, with no room for neutrals. Neutrals were to be targeted for regime change. The author lays out explicitly all the dirty tricks our government tried on other world leaders, from poison to pornography. This dark side of American foreign policy can help Americans better understand our relationships with other countries.

My difficulty with this book is the final chapter. The author throws in some pop-psychology such as; people take in information that confirms their beliefs and reject contradictory information, we can be confident of our beliefs even when we're wrong, etc. The Dulles brothers are definite examples of these psychological aspects. Then the author says the faults of the Dulles brothers are the faults of American society, that we are the Dulles brothers. I felt like a juror in a murder trial during the closing statements, "It's not my client's fault, society is to blame!"

In most of America's foreign adventures, the American people have been tricked with half-truths and outright lies. Further more, these men received the best educations and were granted great responsibility. They should be held to a higher standard than "Oh well, everyone has their prejudices."

I agree with the author that the public should be more engaged in foreign policy and have a better understanding of our history with other nations. However, I think he goes too far in excusing their decisions because they supposedly had the same beliefs as many Americans.

Harry Glasson August 24, 2015

So Eisenhower wasn't really a "do nothing" president, but based on this book, I wish he had done less.

This is the most interesting and important book I have read in the past twenty or more years. Most Americans, myself included, considered John Foster Dulles a great Secretary of State, and few ordinary people knew Allen Dulles or had any idea how the CIA came to be what it is.

Learning the facts as they have been gradually made public by those who were witnesses, and others who researched and wrote about the behavior of the United States during the height of the Cold War has been an enlightening and saddening experience. I was in high school during Eisenhower's first term, in college during his 2nd term, in the Air Force during JFK's time in office and deployed to Key West during the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.

My view of America was the same as that of most Americans. I was patriotic. I bought into the fear of Communist world dominance and the domino theory. But there was much that was being done in the name of fighting Communist domination around the world that was monumentally counterproductive, and contrary what we consider to be some of our basic principles.

This book helps fill important gaps in my knowledge. I highly recommend it to anyone who would like to know what really was going on during the Cold War, its impact on where we are today, and Kinzer's take on why it happened that way.

Mcgivern Owen L on August 15, 2015

The Cold War at it Core

This reviewer generally takes careful notes while he reads-the better to compose a future review. In the case of "The Brothers", he was drawn right into the flow of the story.

"The Brothers" covers the period from the late 1940s to the mid -1960s when John Foster Dulles was the powerful Secretary of State and Allen Dulles was the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. They fermented regime changes in Iran. Guatemala, Indonesia, the Belgian Congo and Iran. And, as many know by now, Cuba as well. The troubles they stirred up in Iran and Cuba persist to this day. The book jacket also states that the Dulles' "led the United States into the Vietnam War..." That statement is unproven within these pages. The Vietnam conflict was vastly too complicated to be reduced to one sentence.

"The Brothers" is sharply written and well documented. There are 55 pages of end notes in a 328 pages of text. Author Kinzer ostensibly turns on the brothers for all their regime changing activities. He then reverses course and arrives at a most sensible elucidation: The brothers Dulles were a product of their times and "exemplified the nation that produced them". A different kind of leader would require a different United States". This reviewer can live with that sentiment.

There was a deadly serious Cold War in session during this period the brothers Dulles were at the core. Author Kinzer deserves credit for capturing the essence of that era as well as he does.

Amazon Customer on August 10, 2015

Informative and entertaining while also scary. Author oversimplifies, omits much about diplomacy besides the Cold War.

This is my third Kinzer book (The Crescent and the Star and Reset), he is a master at spinning off new books from research collected while writing other books. This work peels back the cover on U.S. covert and overt foreign policy in the 1950s and what happens when two brothers have too much power within an Administration that has the public's trust and far too little of its scrutiny. It is a joint biography of John Foster Dulles and Allen Dulles who were Secretary of State (1953-1958) and CIA Director (1953-1961), respectively.

Some reviewers have pointed out that Kinzer tends to oversimplify his message. For example, Eisenhower and Dulles' overthrow of Mohammed Mosadegh, for example, may have had something to do with our needing Britain's support in SE Asia more than simply a crusade to eliminate anyone who was not clearly "for us" or "against the Communists." This book covers some of the territory of Trento's Prelude to Terror, Perkin's controversial Confessions of an Economic Hitman and the similar compilation A Game as Old as Empire. You may not believe what you read here as the facts certainly seem more like fiction. Did the U.S. really (clumsily) secretly spend blood and treasure to try and subvert governments on every continent? How many assassinations and overthrows did Eisenhower surreptitiously give the go-ahead on? Eisenhower essentially comes across as a monster from our 2015 vantage point. But is he any different than a President Obama who is given intelligence and orders drone strikes to assassinate enemies of U.S. foreign policy? You be the judge. This book speaks volumes about what is learned by declassification of documents over time. I will say that I read a great biography on George Kennan last year and there appears to be little overlap; Kennan's foreign policy may have been too dovish for the Dulles, but he had helped create the precursor to the CIA, the Office of Policy Creation, on which both Dulles brothers worked--this connection gets no attention from Kinzer. Much of the diplomatic effort during the Cold War-- which did exist-- at this time are left unmentioned by Kinzer, which is problematic.

The Dulles family grew up with an international mindset. One grandfather (John W. Foster) was an Ambassador (before that title was formalized) to several countries, including Russia, before becoming Secretary of State.The other was a missionary to India. They had other family connections working in diplomacy and such a career seemed just fine to them. Their father was a conservative Presbyterian minister who had an awkward relationship with his wayward children. Kinzer writes that the boys (and their younger sister) essentially saw America as the City on a Hill that was bringing light to the nations through democracy and capitalism.

Studying at Princeton hitched them to the rising star of Woodrow Wilson, who they adored.
Sister Eleanor deserves her own biography, she was a pioneer as a PhD female economist who did relief work in WWI, attended Bretton Woods after WWII, and made her own career in diplomatic service.
John Foster (Foster henceforth) attended the Paris peace conference with Wilson and was disappointed with the outcome, both he and Eleanor arguing along with J.M. Keynes that the German reparations were simply setting the stage for the next European war. At the time, Foster was working in international law for U.S. business interests, and even supposedly ghostwrote a rebuttle to Keynes' book to serve his own interests. Foster's law firm designed the legal arrangements by which U.S. firms could profit off the German reparations, which allowed him to be wealthy even during the Great Depression. He was the more religious of the bunch and was mostly faithful to his wife.

Meanwhile, Allen Dulles was serving in the newly-formed Foreign Service while sleeping with as many women as would have him. In a "What would have been?" moment of history Allen reportedly brushed off meeting Vladimir Lenin, after Lenin supposedly called him just before Lenin went to St. Petersburg for the Russian Revolution, in order to engage in a soiree with a couple of blonde Swiss females. His own sister recounts that he had "at least a hundred" affairs, and his wife approved of some and disapproved of others. A sign of the times, they remain married although she probably miserably. This continued on all through his CIA years and makes one wonder why recent CIA chief David Petraeus had to resign for anything.

Kinzer interestingly calls Wilson out for being a hypocrite, citing his inconsistent application of the doctrine of self-determination. While that doctrine stirred nationalist sentiment in Eastern Europe and the Middle East, Wilson obviously didn't apply it to the Philippines, Hawaii, or other U.S.-occupied territories. Nonetheless, the three sibling Wilson devotees attend the Paris peace talks together. Foster returns to his law firm where he's made a full partner while Allen remains in the Foreign Service until joining the firm himself in 1926.

The author ignores much of Foster's religious interest and involvement in these years. Foster changed his mind several times in life, whether in his religious devotions or from isolationist to interventionist. Interestingly, Foster was a German sympathizer and refused to believe any tales being produced about the Nazis as his firm had many German business interests. Allen disagreed strongly after touring Germany himself, and after Germany began defaulting on its debts the firm severed ties.

Allen Dulles built up his network through the law firm, the Council on Foreign Relations, and his old Foreign Service contacts and made a fortune molding business deals for European connections, including those in Nazi Germany. After the U.S. enters the war, Dulles is recruited by "Wild Bill" for the new OSS, becoming the first OSS officer behind enemy lines, sneaking into Switzerland to do so. He meets with all sorts of characters while feeding intelligence to the U.S., much of which was false, but enough was helpful enough to expand his reputation. Of course, he has many affairs, including a long one with a woman his wife approved of and shared with him. Interestingly, when the Valkyrie operation was launched by German traitors to kill Hitler and restore order, Dulles was the main contact with the U.S. relaying news back to Washington. The participants wanted to sue for peace, but FDR officially rejected the olive branch and Dulles was not allowed to negotiate on any such olive branch. After the War, Truman abolishes the OSS.

Foster helps draft the U.N. Charter and becomes an internationalist, seeing world peace as a Christian ideal. Foster apparently contributed to the "Six Pillars of Peace" outline by the Federal Council of Churches in 1942. He eventually reverses after the Iron Curtain falls, becoming a militant anti-Communist and seeing the USSR as truly and evil empire, the antithesis of everything American. Reinhold Niebuhr eventually pens critiques of Foster as he begins to promote a black-and-white vision of the world.

Both brothers backed the Dewey campaign in 1948, which left them disappointed. However, Dewey appoints Foster Dulles to fill a void in the Senate, which immediately elevates Foster into a higher realm, although he promptly loses the special election for the seat. Nonetheless, he is appointed to the State Department by Truman and impresses people in negotiating the final treaty with Japan in 1950. This makes him a good choice for Secretary of State when Eisenhower is elected in 1952, and Foster promptly works on a policy of "rollback" to replace the "containment" policy of Truman and Kennan.

However, Kinzer also writes that NSC-68, a top secret foreign policy strategy signed by Truman in 1950, was monumental in militarizing the response to the USSR and that the Dulles operated under an NSC-68 mindset. "A chilling decree" according to Kinzer, NSC-68 called for a tripling of defense spending in order to prevent Soviet influence from overtaking the West. Allen Dulles was appointed the first civilian director of the CIA and the die was cast.

The 1950s roll like the Wild West, with Eisenhower signing off on expensive operations, assassinations, and propaganda campaigns at home and abroad. Supposedly, more coups were attempted under Eisenhower than in any other administration, and recently declassified documents show that Dulles' CIA actively engaged in Eisenhower-warranted assassination plots in the Congo and elsewhere. Perhaps Richard Bissell, Eisenhower's enforcer is more to blame than Kinzer allows. The CIA-backed 1954 coup in Guatemala was actually initiated by Truman years earlier, but demonstrated Eisenhower's resolve. "Once you commit the flag, you've committed the country." Dulles' secret armies in Guatemala and the Philippines needed U.S. airpower for support. If the media went with a story exposing operations, or a pilot was shot down, it didn't matter-- the mission must succeed once the U.S. was committed. The CIA even used religious-based propaganda in Guatemala to foment political change, having priests on the CIA payroll publish editorials denouncing Communism.

Guatemala also showed the intersection of U.S. business interests and foreign policy. The coup was encouraged by the United Fruit Company, which had been a client of the Dulles' NY law firm and Allen Dulles had served on its Board of Directors; others in the Eisenhower Administration had ties. While Guatemala's president was democratically elected, he was a leftist, and anyone showing Leftist sympathies was to be eliminated, particularly in the Western hemisphere. The 1953 coup of democratically elected Mohammed Mosaddegh in Iran was similar in the sense that it was made more urgent by Mosaddegh's nationalization of British oil interests after the Brits refused to let Mosaddegh audit their books or negotiate a better deal. Kinzer writes, however, that Foster in particular was unable to see anyone as "neutral." Mosaddegh believed in democracy and capitalism and could have been an ally, but Mosaddegh and others like Egypt's Nasser were nationalists who favored neither the US nor the USSR, but courted deals from both. Kinzer writes that Foster saw a danger in a country like Iran becoming prosperous and inspiring others toward neutrality that might result in eventual creep toward the USSR, hence he and others like him had to be eliminated. How much the coup was driven to help the UK is unknown. The blowback from intervention in South America and Iran has since come back to haunt the US in the form of skepticism and greater Leftist angst against the US and the 1979 overthrow of the Shah.

Ho Chi Minh had initially offered the US an olive branch after WWII and was not opposed to working with US interests, but the more he was rebuffed the more he turned to harder Communism. John Foster Dulles apparently hated the French for abandoning Vietnam, and never forgave them. While Eisenhower did not want to replace the French in Vietnam, he eventually warmed to the idea as Foster promoted the "domino theory" that if one nation fell victim to Communism then others would soon follow and the eventual war would widen. Better to install brutal dictators as in Iran and South Vietnam than let a country fall. Another enemy was Sukarno in Indonesia who was trying to thread the needle between democracy, socialism, nationalism, and Islam. This type of neutrality was against the Dulles' worldview, and in his memoir, Sukarno lamented "America, why couldn't you be my friend?" after the CIA spent a lot of manpower trying to topple his regime in 1958. There was also the training of Tibetan rebels in Colorado in 1957 and the ongoing plot to assassinate Congo's Lumumba, given with Ike's consent.

Allen Dulles' reign at CIA reads like the nightmare everyone worried about "big government" warns you about. Experiments interrogating prisoners with LSD, the purchase to the movie rights of books like The Quiet American in order to sanitize them, planting stories in major newspapers, planting false documents in Joseph McCarthy's office to discredit him, along with the private armies and escapades. Dulles comes under official criticism by Doolittle, who wrote that he was a bad administrator, bad for morale, and had no accountability-- all of which was dismissed by Eisenhower who saw Allen as the indispensible man.

Eventually both John Foster Dulles and Eisenhower become old and unhealthy, Eisenhower suffering a heart attack in 1955 and Foster dying of cancer in 1959. Allen Dulles' libido slows slightly as age takes its toll and he becomes more detached from operations at the CIA, creating a more dangerous situation. When Castro seizes power in Cuba, the Eisenhower Administration made it official policy to depose him. While Dulles was officially in charge at the CIA, he was far detached from the details of the anti-Castro operations which the media had exposed and continued at great risk of failure.

Newly-elected JFK inherits the Bay of Pigs invasion plans and faces a political dilemma: Back off and be accused of sparing Castro since the government was invested in success, or go forward and risk a disaster. Unlike Eisenhower, Kennedy would not consent to air support or other official military measures to help the CIA's army once it landed, dooming the operation. Those closest to the operation begged Dulles and others to cancel the operation to no avail. Dulles was enjoying a speaking engagement elsewhere in the region, giving the appearance of attachment to the operation while being completely oblivious to its failure. The White House forced him to resign in 1961.

Dulles' last act was on the Warren Commission investigating JFK's assassination. This was problematic because Dulles' goal was to keep CIA assassination operations in Cuba a secret. Kinzer writes of Lyndon Johnson's desire to make Oswald a lone gunman with no political attachments, which brings us to a whole other story.

Kinzer concludes the book with armchair psychology, writing that the Dulles brothers succummed to cognitive biases, including confirmation bias. They saw everything in the world as they wanted to, and not as it was. They were driven by a missionary Calvinism and the ideal of American Exceptionalism that clouded their lenses. They also seemed to consider themselves infallible in their endeavors. Ultimately, "they are us," writes Kinzer, which is why it is important to learn from them. The parallels with recent American military and para-military endeavors is also clear, but Kinzer lets the reader make those comparisons.

I learned a great deal from the history of this book, studying the Dulles is an integral part in studying the execution of American foreign policy in the Cold War. Some of the omissions, simplifications, and psychoanalysis mar the book somewhat. 3.5 stars out of 5.

Doug Nort, on April 23, 2015

Too Much Passion;Too Few Facts

This book is marred by Kinzer's repeated overstatements and failures to marshal facts to support his theses about the Dulles brothers.

His failure to persuade me begins early: In the introduction Kinzler wrote of the naming of Washington's Dulles airport: "The new president, John F. Kennedy, did not want to name an ultra-modern piece of America's future after a crusty cold-war militant." He provides no documentation that Kennedy himself thought that. Given that JFK was proud of his own credentials as a cold warrior, it is unlikely that was his objection. It is much more likely his objection (or that of the staffer speaking for him in the matter) was that Foster Dulles was an iconic figure of the Eisenhower administration-which Kennedy and his New Frontiersmen viewed as having made a hash of things-or that he was a stalwart of the Republican Party, or that Dulles disapproved of a Catholic becoming president. Kinzler apparently thinks his sweeping statement is self-evident but it isn't to me.

A few pages later Kinzler gives us another hint that the pages to come will contain sweeping, unsupported generalizations. He wrote "The story of the Dulles brothers is the story of America." My goodness, didn't they share their times with FDR and Ralph Bunche and Dwight Eisenhower and Tom Watson and A. Phillip Randolph and George Marshall and a host of others who, although coming from backgrounds quite different from the brothers Dulles, are just as much the American story? The accomplishments and peccadillos of two brothers with an upper-class pedigree is hardly "the story of America."

Chapter eleven contains several such unsupported or historically blinkered generalizations. At one point (sorry-I'm a Kindle reader, no page numbers), after noting "the depth of fear that gripped many Americans during the 1950s." Kinzler asserts that "Foster and Allen were the chief promoters of that fear." Crowning the brothers as chief fear-mongers ignores some powerful other voices: Khrushchev, Joe McCarthy, General Curtis Lemay, Nixon, Churchill, Drew Pearson, Robert Welch and his John Birch Society-the list could continue.

At another point Kinzler says, "They [the brothers] never imagined that their intervention[s] . . . would have such devastating long-term effects." He cites Vietnam, Iran falling into violently anti-American leadership, and the Congo descending "into decades of horrific conflict." Regarding Vietnam, I think most historians would say that JFK, LBJ, and McNamara bear much, much more responsibility than do the Dulles brothers. As for their Iran and Congo sins, I believe those developments were much more due to unpredictable consequences than to the Dulles' blindness. Yogi is right: "Predictions are hard, especially about the future."

And on the same page (excuse me "location") Kinzler is quite certain that "Their lack of foresight led them to pursue reckless adventures that, over the course of decades, palpably weakened American security." The reader who already believes that will nod and read on while the reader who expects this ringing declaration to be followed by specifics that provide powerful support will read it and say, like the customer in the fast food ad, "where's the beef?"

OK, enough already. Kinzler's writing obviously pushed my buttons and I wouldn't have finished the book but for it being a selection of my book club. I am fine with criticism of people and policies when well-documented-for example Michael Oren's Power, Faith and Fantasy-but I lose patience with book-length op-ed pieces such as The Brothers.

Dale P. Henkenon, April 6, 2015

Cuba Si! Yankee No!

If a work based on Cold War history could construct a case against American (U.S.) exceptionalism, The Brothers by Stephen Kinzler would be a strong candidate. It illustrates the dangers of a coupling of foreign policy and covert operations involving what we now know as regime change.

It is a story of the Dulles brothers and coups arranged by the executive branch triad composed of the President (Ike) and the dynamic duo of the Dulles brothers as Secretary of State and Director of the CIA (without congressional oversight) in Guatemala, Iran, Cuba, Indonesia, the Congo and Vietnam.

It is a story that deserved to be told and it is told well. It is somewhat slow going at the start and one-dimensional but is a captivating read regardless. It is not a rigorous biography or history of the era and the events it depicts. It is driven by the thesis that our actions in the developing world even though driven by anti-communism or American idealism or Christian fundamentalist fervor (all were involved) can have baleful results.

The results can be so bad that Americans are now resented and even hated and have been for generations in large parts of the world. Highly recommended.

R. Spell VINE VOICE on March 28, 2015

Who We Are as Americans in the 50s

Engaging historical perspective that while dragging and repetitive at times, has so much information that frames our world now, and generally NOT in a positive way, that it should be required reading. Yes, I was aware of the name as a 61 yr old. But I was not aware of their roles. Not aware of brothers. Not aware of Allen's involvement in the CIA. Nor aware of their careers at the massive law firm of Cromwell and Sullivan.

But reading this was stunning and made me angry. George Dulles was more responsible for the Cold War than anyone. And documents after the war shows the Soviets were not near as devious as we give them credit for. But our fear painted a view of a hidden enemy bent on our destruction. We missed opportunities with Khrushchev. More importantly and totally unaware to me, these guys we responsible for government overthrows and were actively involved in the 1950s with alienating Vietnam leading eventually to a horrible loss of civilian lives and more importantly to me, American soldiers who were led in to the wrong war at the wrong time.

But let us not forget the documented CIA overthrows of Congo, Guatemala,Indonesia and Iran. Is this America? Well, in the post WWII world, we lost our values and stooped to such tactics.

There are stories here America doesn't study and they should. How the interface of commerce, politics and war can lead to disastrous results that haunt us today.

Read this book to learn. Not all of it will make you proud. Yes, I learned. And yes, I'm angry and ashamed.

Schnitzon February 25, 2015

Allen Dulles May have Inadvertently Saved the US from a Nuclear Holocaust

It is ironic that the Bay of Pigs debacle commissioned by Allen Dulles may have inadvertently prevented the incineration of millions of Americans in a nuclear holocaust. As the author points out when John F. Kennedy assumed the presidency he was told by his predecessor Dwight Eisenhower that the invasion of Cuba by Cuban refugees with support from the US should move forward. As a young, new President of the US, Kennedy did not want to appear weak so when Dulles presented him with the plan seeking his approval Kennedy found himself in a box.

On the one hand Kennedy had doubts regarding the chances for success. On the other hand he wanted to appear strong to the people of the US and the world. This was the first true test of his presidency and legacy. After the abject failure of the operation Kennedy to his credit took full responsibility in his address to the American people but he would never again trust the CIA or the military.

Fast forward tot he Cuban missile crisis. If Kennedy had not experienced the Bay of Pigs failure he probably would have placed more trust in the military and CIA who were vehemently urging him to bomb Cuba at various stages of the crisis. If he had taken the military's advice it would have likely resulted in escalation and possibly nuclear war with Russia. As it turned out Kennedy rejected the advice and negotiated a settlement which saved face for both sides. Kennedy's wisdom born of a past failure saved the day.


Compelling and informative about an era which had a darker ...

OLD1mIKEon February 17, 2015

The Dulles Brothers. They changed History.

Five Stars. Great book. Readable. Well researched, Informative. Highly recommended for someone interested in mid 20th century history or understanding the root cause of the anti-american animosity in certain parts of the world.

The Dulles brothers played pivotal roles in an incredible number of historic events that shaped the 20th century. They exemplified american attitudes and beliefs of their day and were placed in positions to act on these beliefs. The book not only presents their part in history, but also helps us understand the reasoning behind their actions.

I should leave the book review end with the above paragraphs, but I was originally unaware of how many key historical events of the 20th century the brothers participated in and influenced. I find it impossible not to casually speculate on their effect on history. John Foster helped write the Reparation portion of the WWI Treaty of Versailles. Some historians believe German anger over the unfairness of the reparations to be one element causing WWII. John Foster helped write the 1924 Dawes Plan that opened the door to American investment in Germany. Even in 1924 John Foster was obsessed with fighting communism. He saw a strong Germany as an effective stop gap against communistic expansion. Foster used his affiliation with Sullivan & Cromwell and his friendship with Hjalmar Schacht, Hitlers Minister of Economics, to increase American investment in Germany and its industry. Without international investment, Germany probably could not have supported it's military aspirations. Allen and the CIA was instrumental in the 1953 Iranian Coup that overthrew the democratically elected Iranian Government to install the Shaw of Iran. This action and the heavy handed governing style of the Shaw certainly led to some of the anti American resentment in the middle east today and the Iranian (Islamic) Rebellion in 1979. The Iranian Rebellion probably helped elect Ronald Reagan in 1980. In regard to Vietnam. Foster, acting as Eisenhower's Secretary of State, refused to sign the 1954 Geneva Accord. Over considerable objections, John Foster and Allen chose and installed Ngo Dinh Diem as the 1st president of the newly created Republic of South Vietnam. Diem had been a minor official in Vietnam and was Interior Minister for three months in 1933. He had not held a job since. Once in power, Allen's CIA helped keep him there. John Foster continued to support the escalation of our involvement in Vietnam until his death in 1959. Allen took a hands off approach to the Bay of Pigs operation (17 April 1961), but as the Director of the CIA, it was his responsibility. JFK fired him in November 1961. There are JFK Assassination Conspiracy Theory's that include CIA involvement. It is interesting that Lyndon Johnson personally chose Allen to be a member of the Warren Commission. Add U2 Spy Planes, Congo revolts, overthrow of South American leaders, Cuba and a host more. The policies and action of these two men changed global history and probably still effect the beliefs of many today.

Loves the View VINE VOICE on December 2, 2014

Attitude, Access, Ambition and US Foreign Policy

Stephen Kinzer shows how instrumental these brothers were in the design of US foreign policy in the post war years. He shows how their attitudes and personalities were formed, developed, and grew to influence the course of history.

The brothers' learned statecraft at their grandfather's side. John W. Foster, US ambassador to three countries, later served as President Harrison's trouble shooter and Secretary of State. He helped in the overthrow of Queen Liliuokalani in Hawaii and later used his State Department connections to engineer government policy to benefit his corporate clients. Kinzer shows how the brothers benefited from their grandfather's access and came to dual pinnacles of power in shaping US foreign policy: one heading the CIA, the other the Department of State.

The 1950's operations weren't as hidden as I expected. Allen Dulles, in the Saturday Evening Post, beamed with pride for removing Mohammad Mossadegh in Iran and Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala. He even has copies made of Diego Rivera's critical mural where he is depicted taking money while his brother shakes hands with a local puppet and Eisenhower is pictured on a bomb. Many willingly joined in dirty tricks, for instance Cardinal Spellman wrote a pastoral letter to Guatemalan Catholics calling their President a dangerous communist.

I was surprised that President Eisenhower, whose administration is commonly thought to be one of tranquility, approved toppling governments and assassinating leaders. In some ways, he was the front man, for instance urging Congress to approve funds for "maintenance of national independence" but really for fomenting a coup in Syria and installing a king in Saudi Arabia to get US friendly governments to oppose Gamal Nasser (p. 225).

With today's internet and 24 hour news cycle, can large covert operations such as those against the President Sukarno (the first president of Indonesia who naively looked to the US for help in developing his nation's fledgling democracy) go under the radar? I presume the CIA budget can still hide items such as the $6 million a year paid to the Nazi General Reinhard Gehlen (who should have been tried at Nuremberg (p. 185)).

By preventing compromise when compromise was possible, the brothers and President Eisenhower, prolonged the Cold War into the Khruschev era and sowed the seeds of the Vietnam War. The lack of reflection or personal responsibility is clear in the quote on p. 283 when years later Allen Dulles coolly tells Eric Sevareid regarding the torture and murder of Patrice Lumumba, that " we may have overrated the danger.." How would the Congo be today if the US had left its fledgling democracy alone, and not have installed Mobutu in a leadership position?

The last coup attempt in the book is the Bay of Pigs. It was an Eisenhower approved intervention and there seemed that to be no turning back for Kennedy. Its fiasco signaled the end of Allen Dulles, but not the Cold War since its relic, Vietnam as a domino, was an image deeply ingrained in policy DNA.

In a side story, the brothers show little consideration to their sister, who had to push to have a career. She marginally benefits from the family name. They do not see that they have been born on third base and she on first. In fact, when it is convenient for them, they try to fire her, yet still go to her house for holiday dinners.

Kinzer concludes with recent work in psychology and personality profiling (" blind ourself to contrary positions prepared to pay a high price to preserve our most cherished ideas declarations of high confidence mainly tell you an individual has constructed a coherent story in his mind beliefs become how you prove your identity.." p. 322) that not only characterize the brothers, but a lot of the thinking in the Cold War.

These paradigms are with us today. Too many politicians and their appointees still their job as responding to lobbyists, not just for big business, but for foreign countries with interests contrary to those of the US. Similarly there are those who force their economic ideology on small and helpless countries. The book tells a sobering and troubling story. It is greatly at odds with what is taught in high schools. This book has been out for a year now, and it seems the story told is just more noise in political system. Unfortunately it will make a large event for insiders in Washington to reflect on what we now call "muscular" foreign policy and its results.

Regnal the Caretakeron November 13, 2014

Nasty lawyers and the rise of CIA

These two globo-corporate lawyers dictated USA foreign policy during governance of four presidents: Roosevelt, Truman (he signed CIA into the law in 1947), Eisenhower and Kennedy. They were called 'Cold Warriors' and built Cold War model which rested on the premise that any growing social influence in Third World countries must be resisted because socialist gains are always irreversible. Any nation that tried to stay 'neutral' had to face CIA interventions that did not bring anything positive for populations (notably we learn in details about Guatemala, Iran, Congo, Indonesia, Vietnam and Cuba). Eisenhower times were the worst, when covert capability of CIA grew massively.

Fascinating work by Stephen Kinzer can be easily extrapolated to help explain XXI century behavior of Washington. Not much has changed.

Craig N. Warrenon November 12, 2014

Making the World Safe for Democracy (and American Business).

I've learned more about the development of American foreign policy and international relations in the twentieth (and twenty-first) century, especially since WWII, in reading the story of these two scions of an American aristocratic family, who were fully steeped in Calvinistic Protestantism (and it's capitalist ethic) and unquestioningly convinced of American Exceptionalism and it's Manifest Destiny to lead the world and make it safe for democracy and American Business, than I have anywhere else.

This is more than a biography (or double biography) of two very influential actors in American history, politics and international relations. It is an exposition of the quintessential, archetypical American (WASP) mindset, worldview or psychology that has motivated our collective international behavior over the past six or seven decades.

Digital Rightson June 14, 2014


A "How to Not Run Foreign Policy" Primer

Stephen Kinzer's new book offers a very focused and surgical condemnation of the Dulles brothers foreign policy collaboration in the 1950's that has resulted in a horrid and nightmarish chain of events ever since.

Allen Dulles at CIA, first as a lead operative for covert missions and then as it's second Director and John Foster Dulles as Secretary of State lead foreign policy during the Eisenhower Presidency. The book goes through six operations to overthrow or destabilize governments through that time; Iran, Guatemala, Indonesia, Cuba, Vietnam and the formerly Belgian Congo.

In each case Kinzer shows the limited lens of cold war anti communism that resulted in the Dulles' tunnel vision where grouping all non-Pro American groups as enemies and communists. He equally addresses their lack of personal curiosity and intellect and preference for slogans and absolutism over analysis or objective debate. All State employees that don't hew the line are regularly fired or transferred to obscure jobs or roles and in place are pro-CIA hardliners.

It is painful reading. The objective was to both create the world they wanted while limiting the use of US military personnel to achieve those ends. The short cuts and limited world vision have exacted a terrible price. Sadly there is not a place in the world where their activities resulted in any sustainable success and in fact have lead to perhaps millions of deaths and suspicions and misunderstandings for the next 50 to 60 years.

There is much here that further condemns Eisenhower. In many cases he fully supported and endorsed their plans while pretending not to, fully employing the most cynical of strategies; "plausible deniability".

Having read the 2012 Eisenhower biography by Jean Edward Smith I was surprised here by the wealth of information that ties Eisenhower more directly to clandestine activities and their purposes. Particularly disappointing is his continues build up for the Bay of Pigs invasion in Cuba after Kennedy's election but before he took office and will little effort to brief the incoming president. Similarly our Vietnam involvement in the 1950's was so deep already as to make a Kennedy pullout far more difficult.

There is much here about these issues and the corrupt relationships between the Dulles's prior careers at Sullivan and Cromwell and their support of private interests while working at State and the CIA.

It's grim but the writing is good and the story is well worth knowing.

C. Ellen Connally, May 22, 2014

An amazing tale of intrigue and deception

As we fly in or out of Dulles International Airport, no one gives much thought to the namesake, John Foster Dulles. Sure, he was Secretary of State and some Americans have a vague knowledge of his brother Allan Dulles, director of the CIA and long time super spy and intelligence person. Reading Stephen Kinzer's book, THE BROTHERS reveals the truth about the Dulles brothers and how they changed American and World History.

At the heart of the story is the unfortunate belief by the brothers that if a country was not totally in agreement with American philosophy they were against us. Any nationalist leaders of a former colonial nation that believed in land reform or neutrality on the international scene had to be evil and must be destroyed. If they were not with us, they had to be communist. This American foreign policy changed the history of the Middle East, Southeast Asia, Africa and Central America.

There is much blame put on President Johnson for the War in Viet Nam. But reading THE BROTHERS shows that the roots of the Viet Nam Conflict go back many years. Likewise, the situation in the Middle East. We have to go back and look at the foreign policy that created the tensions that now exist and the men that shaped that foreign policy.

Its interesting to note that Kinzer asserts that on the death of Chief Justice Fred Vinson in 1953, Eisenhower offered the position of Chief Justice to John Foster Dulles. According to Kinzer, Dulles turned it down because he wanted to stay at the State Department. The story has always been that Ike had promised Earl Warren the first seat on the Supreme Court in exchange for his support in the 1952 election - Warren had been out maneuvered by Richard Nixon to get the bid for the vice presidency. How different legal history would have been had John Foster Dulles become Chief Justice!

Kinzer is a masterful story teller. This book is extremely readable and a must read for understanding the history of American foreign policy and how individual people can change.

John Berryon March 13, 2014

What Our History Lessons Didn't Tell Us!

It has been a long time since an author has captured my interest so quickly and made me question everything I have been taught or have learned about our country. Churchill once said Democracy is the worst kind of government except all others. This comment keeps reverberating around in my mind as I read this book. I am one of those people that have flown into Dulles airport countless times, yet never gave a moments thought as to why, what or even if there was a who to the airports name. I grew up during the cold war and I vividly remember the fear of the Big Russian Bear overtaking us with their form of government and the possibility of nuclear war. It would have never crossed my mind that my very own government aided and abetted in promoting this fear in order for us to gain public moral outrage and support for our endeavors. I kept trying to tell myself this was different times, yet the author pointed out countless times where there were those in the known that were summarily dismissed for having counter opinions.Or leaders from our allies that would not support the Dulles brothers opinions and missions that so disagreed with who we told the world we were. Abraham Lincoln once said "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power". I can think of no better example of failure in handling power than the two Dulles brothers. Not only was I continuously shocked by their gross misuse of power, but I found myself being angry at them as well because of the fear I remember my mother facing as a widower with three children to raise. She needed not to have been this afraid with all the other issues she had to deal with but because of President Eisenhower and the Dulles brothers she had to face this fear as well. Whether or not Mr. Kinzer took liberties with the political agenda's of the leaders we either overthrew or attempted to overthrown does not matter to me at all. The fact that we promoted our country as a free democracy yet we were willing to dance with any leader in the world as long as they did exactly what we wanted them to do is so counter to the way I was raised to believe still leaves me reeling.

Currently in the news President Putin has said in no uncertain terms that the U.S. is responsible for the revolution taking place in the Ukraine. In the past I would have said he is just another Russian bully trying to get his way. After reading The Brothers I now wonder what, if anything, my country had to do with promoting this revolution. I heard our Ukraine Ambassador say almost word for word what I read in this book our ambassador's under the power of The Brother's said back during the cold war. The author tells us that the U.S. with its secret prisons and torture's may have actually invented terrorism.

This author has opened my eyes to a whole new way of thinking and I am so disappointed in opportunities missed and I am so disappointed with our current leaders for having learned apparently nothing from history.

If you love reading history then please buy this book and ask your family to read it as well. Do I believe everything I read, no not usually, but in this case there are just too many facts that distort my view of who we are to dismiss.

James Gallen VINE VOICE on March 4, 2014

An Indepth Study Of American Covert Action

"The Brothers" tells the story of the brothers Dulles, John Foster and Allen, who drove American foreign policy through much of the 1950s. Grandsons of Secretary of State John Foster and nephews of Secretary of State Robert Lansing, the two grew up in an atmosphere mixing high diplomacy with the spirit of Christian Crusaders. Their path to power was linear. At the law firm of Sullivan and Cromwell they represented companies with interests around the world and came to see their clients' interests united with America's. As Foster moved into politics and government service he often brought Allen with him.

Although expected to be Secretary of State in a Dewey Administration, Foster came in with Dwight Eisenhower in 1953. With Allen as Director of Central Intelligence, they formed a team that searched the world for dragons to slay. Guided by a world view of us, American Christian capitalists, against them, Socialist Evil Doers, they identified their foes and went after them. Among their successes were Guatemalan President Árbenz, Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh and Congolese leader Patrice Lumumba. TYhose who got away included Ho Chi Minh and Fidel Castro. This book is a study of American covert operations in Guatemala, Iran, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Congo and Cuba. Allen's Bay of Pigs operation is a case study of disaster.

Author Stephen Kinzer explores the unique situation in which the intelligence gathering agency is also an actor. Throughout he illustrates how the relationship of their leaders enabled two agencies that would normally question and check each other, to work in seamless harmony to carry out the covert operations that both saw as primary instruments of American power. Behind them was President Eisenhower who had used covert operations during World War II and who approved their actions. In the end the author posits that the policies were the President's and the brothers were more his servants than his masters.

Kinzer portrays the Brothers as men with rigid, narrow outlooks that saw enemies in independent nationalists and conspiracies in disorganized movements. He presents them as two sides of the coin, the molders and reflectors of public opinion. The book is not flattering. It depicts the Dulles brothers as men whose flawed expectations caused many problems for the U.S. and the world by destroying men who America need not have fought. Ultimately he concludes that they were representatives of the people they served and their successes, and failures, are our own. "The Brothers" forces the reader to confront a portion of America's past with its triumphs and shames. Although Kinzer gives his opinions, he provides the facts to permit the reader to form his own. Any serious student of history would do well to delve beneath the surface of our history and appreciate its deep currents and lasting effects.