← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Hivemindgammahydra7
Thread ID: 20370 | Posts: 14 | Started: 2005-09-24
2005-09-24 03:38 | User Profile
[font=Times New Roman][size=3][color=Navy]Hivemind disclaimer:[/color] I am boiling mad at the things I see and hear every day, and today is no different.
I've long accepted Thomas Chittum's book Civil War II, was the most authoritative work on the Mexican invasion of this country. When I first read it I was amazed at how many things he accurately predicted years in advance of recent events. I accepted then and have since believed that, sooner or later, a race war would eventually erupt.
Now I have my doubts.
Today it was announced that illegal alien trash are going to get material aid as hurricane relief, and the Catholic church is further calling upon the government to give them cash aid to boot. This on top of an endless and accelerating series of outrages which have the net result of disenfranchising U.S. citizens and taxpayers while enriching the Hispanic parasites. The list of affronts is nearly endless and I won't waste your time with them all here (AmRen is good for that), but rather want to know:
When will CW2 begin, and what will start it? Or, will whites remain bent over the chair and continue to being sodomized ad infinitum by the ruling elites, and (apart from the stray individual), do nothing?
I am at once choked with anger and filled with despair, for it seems to me that whites are content to march into extinction while the brown tide rolls right over them. Nothing seems to be enough to provoke white people to fight back.
Am I seeing the situation accurately?[/size][/font]
2005-09-24 05:27 | User Profile
[url]http://firebaseskull.com/[/url]
2005-09-24 05:35 | User Profile
I have not yet read Chittum's Civil War II, but I've been meaning to because I've heard good things about it. I also like Chittum's online columns, though he can be over-the-top at times.
Since I haven't read that book yet, I can't offer my opinions on it specifically. But I don't think it's unreasonable to expect some serious racial unrest in our future. It could be anything from pockets of rioting popping up with increased frequency here and there across the land to something much more violent, persistent, and widespread. Chittum evidently predicts the latter. While he may be mistaken, I certainly don't think his prediction can be merely shrugged off.
I do believe that sooner or later the US will collapse into smaller territories, much as the USSR did. Whether this will happen in my lifetime is tough to predict, but when it does happen, I think it will result from a combination of racial tension, economic factors (these overlap significantly, of course), and possibly ideological division. The US is a ship that's sinking on account of the excessive cargo it's carrying: the price of maintaining the welfare-warfare state is escalating with no end in sight. There's the cost of supporting all those illegal immigrants and welfare recipients plus the even greater economic and political costs of trying to dominate much of the world for the benefit of Zionists and plutocrats. Citizens are eventually going to be taxed to the breaking point, and the government might become even more tyrannical in an effort to suppress political dissent (e.g., those who speak out against using the US military in Zionist wars). A loss of financial wellbeing combined with subjection to government bullying could motivate a lot of people of all races to resort to extreme measures. When that happens, it will be up to whites to defend themselves against both government thugs and vengeful, racially-motivated predators. If that happens, hopefully the situation will be resolved with a minimum of violence and maybe even with the formation of an exclusive white nation in the midst of the fragmented former US.
I think the best whites can do now is arm themselves to the teeth and generally prepare for the worst while waiting to see what happens.
2005-09-24 05:59 | User Profile
Civil War II will take place in the first half of this century--Chittum predicts 2015, but that seems too soon. His list of CWII "symptoms" is worth the price of the book.
It's noteworthy that Dr. Sam Francis argued against Chittum's central thesis--suggesting that the Plutocracy wanted Brazilianization (rather than Balkanization) of America and would likely get it.
2005-09-24 07:06 | User Profile
[font=Times New Roman][size=3]What did Mr. Francis mean by "Brazilianization?"[/size][/font]
2005-09-24 07:37 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Hivemindgammahydra7]When will CW2 begin, and what will start it? Or, will whites remain bent over the chair and continue to being sodomized ad infinitum by the ruling elites, and (apart from the stray individual), do nothing?
I am at once choked with anger and filled with despair, for it seems to me that whites are content to march into extinction while the brown tide rolls right over them. Nothing seems to be enough to provoke white people to fight back.
Am I seeing the situation accurately?[/QUOTE]I am inclined to believe you. Thomas Chittum is right on the sources of unrest, the injustices, etc. but he makes a very elementary mistake when he assumes that injustices automatically lead to revolt. In fact if you look at history 99% of the time the opposite is true. Didn't Hitler himself say the masses could easily be persuaded with a little mass communication that heaven is hell and hell is heaven? Or in the words of the old russian proverb, I can make you drink urine, and you will call it holy water.
The fringe right in this country is basically full of non-sensical political myths/idols. There's the constitutionalist-libertarian myth of the sovereign constitution, then there's the White nationalist myth of the spontaneuous white uprising. All a pack of bull to me.
Here is a very good analysis by Jim Kalb if anyone wants some depth.
.............This reviewerââ¬â¢s main objection to the bookââ¬â¢s overall analysis is that it is too schematic and ignores important features of the situation. It underestimates empires and overestimates the current prospects for the nation-state. And it seems to transfer aspects of the situation in the former Yugoslavia directly to America, where conditions are quite different.
Not all empires are unstable. If an empire is established at the end of a time of troubles, when other possibilities have played themselves out, and its principle of rule seems better than anything else available, it can be very stable. The Roman Empire, which conquered a politically depleted Hellenistic world, ruled that world until the coming of Islam, and as an idea has lived on to the present. The Chinese empire, erected at the conclusion of the Warring States period in 221 B.C., made the Han people (named for the first stable imperial dynasty), and in substance is still with us.
The demographic transformation of the United States of America is less an event in the history of the American federal union than an aspect of a worldwide process, the dissolution of local sovereign polities and their integration into a new world order based on transnational bureaucracies and world markets. The fate of America cannot be considered apart from that process. Since the NWO is coming about through destruction of conditions favoring the existence of sovereign nation-states the United States may indeed fall apart at some point, but most likely not in the way Chittum suggests................
The principles behind the NWO are thus enormously powerful. Much of that power results from the weakening of other principles of social organization. [B]In spite of its innate corruption, the NWO will remain as long as there is nothing to replace it, and it is very good at subverting possible competitors.[/B] The destruction of ethnicity, religion and sexual distinctions as recognized legitimate grounds for action is universally praised today as a victory over bigotry, and it leaves little upon which social order might be based other than bureaucracy and markets. Nor is the comprehensive victory of bureaucracy and markets merely ideological. That victory has been practically entrenched by disruption of such fundamental principles as family, faith and nation, a disruption sufficiently radical to make them increasingly incapable of grounding social order.
[url]http://jkalb.org/node/11[/url]
2005-09-24 14:14 | User Profile
It appears to me that events are unfolding pretty much as predicted by Chittum and William S. Lind. However, since none of us can know the future, all you can do is prepare yourself for the outcome you want to see and roll the dice.
2005-09-24 14:27 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Hivemindgammahydra7][font=Times New Roman][size=3]What did Mr. Francis mean by "Brazilianization?"[/size][/font][/QUOTE]
I'm not able to find Dr. Francis's original critique of Tom Chittum's scenario--it was evidently published in the June, 1998 newsletter of Americans for Self-Determination.
Here's the response of Jeff Anderson, President of AFSD, to Sam's article:**
June 6, 1998
Jeff Anderson Americans for Self-Determination PO Box 1143 Falls Church VA 22041-1143
ON CIVIL WAR ll
I have a few thoughts on the Sam Francis critique of CIVIL WAR II IN THE June issue. Sam's major criticism of Chittum's ghastly scenario is that the power elites will not let it happen, but rather, with utter contempt for Middle America, will ride them all the way down to Brazilianization. I think he is over- estimating the power of establishment propaganda and underestimating the American people. There are growing danger signs for the regime, as polls show a shrinking minority of people trust the government to do the right thing, compared to a large majority three decades ago. It's beginning to dawn on them how the two party con game works and how far advanced their own dispossession is. Given a few foreign policy disasters, i.e., unmanageable wars, and some serious economic problems, which is not at all farfetched, the country might be ready for a nationalist party of a Buchananite stamp. Granted, the manipulators have been able so far to shut out such a message, but for how long? There is some genuine fear and hysterics among the elites today that wasn't present a few years ago. The main assumption of the second amendment is that an honest and loyal government should have nothing to fear from an armed citizenry, but the elites are in a panic to disarm Middle America. The manipulators appear to be much less confident in their powers than Sam is.
He argues that the ruling elites that gave us Balkanization will be able to control it, but I think not. Racial and ethnic loyalties are too strong and intractable, and as Chittum says, multiethnic empires usually die die a violent death. As Brent A. Nelson says in America Balkanized (page 68), "It is highly probable, given the trends evident in the 1990's, that at some point in the first half of the twenty-first century...an unstable mix of First World and Third World peoples, will produce a political crisis of such dimensions as to be insoluble within the traditional limits of American governance."
During the LA riots, which many take as a preview of coming events, the police and national guard looked incompetent to me. I remember the scene where a major police station was almost overun by the mob.
Actually, I don't think it will ever come to a full blown civil war that Chittum speaks of, nor the Brazilianization that Sam predicts. I think a more likely outcome is that we'll come to the abyss, with a full summer of rioting, and it will scare the pance off us. The result will be some kind of peace that involves decentralization and states rights which we have all been longing for. The federal government will be blamed for the mess their Balkanization caused and be thoroughly discredited, which would lead states into rebellion, demanding tenth Amendment rights.
The nonsense about diversity being our strength will be blown away as ethnostates are formed. It will be voluntary disassociation on a mass scale. Black and Hispanic states might get financial help from Whites as "reparations", and there could be liberal and libertarian states of a multiracial nature.
I agree with Sam that racial and ethnic loyalties, while being strong, especially among nonwhites, are not absolute. Other social relationships and interests would come into play, but the end result would be people gravitating to the states they find congenial. The competition would be healthy, and success would be imitated.
Hopefully, states could subdivide or merge according to demographics and desires expressed in referendums. A happy corollary would be an America First foreign policy and the end of our overseas empire. Our current foreign policy is so incompetent, we may be destroyed by weapons of mass destruction before any of the above scenarios are played out.
Jeff Anderson Arlington, VA Americans for Self-Determination
[url]http://www.separatism.org/civilwar_prt.htm[/url]
2005-09-24 14:33 | User Profile
Although it pains me to say so, there will be no CWII. The once magnificent White race has become a cowering gaggle of PC wimps with as much cohesion as a bag of teflon balls. There will be no fight, no resistance, no demand that we regain our lost nation. Indeed, we will continue to elect and give credence to those in high office, [B][I]of our own race,[/I][/B] who endorse and actively work for the elimination of American culture (Ala George Bush) and the margininalization of the White European population that created it. Welcome to Azatlan!
2005-09-24 14:47 | User Profile
"Brazilianization" means a nation with the racial make up and ruling class similar to Brazil. Brazil is a teeming swamp of all types of racial mixtures, Black, Indian, Mestizio and Mulatto fighting with each other over scraps thrown to them by the few wealthy, primarily White, who actually run things down there. While the Plutocracy of Brazil is mainly White, one also finds folks of other races as well. Money is the deciding factor on who gets in. The Middle class down there is far outnumbered by the groups above and the Plutocrats want it that way for it is easier for them to rule over this sqaubbling mass of humanity than it is over a large middle class. Needless to say, this is something the Wall Street slugs salivate over for America.
2005-09-24 14:54 | User Profile
Absolutely, Sert. A Middle Class just sucks up the Plutocracy's profit margin--and Blue Collar folks here have been on the downslide since 1973...
Brazilianization means a mongrelized and propagandized Third World police state--with a deracinated WASP/Jewish Oligarchy.
2005-09-24 16:05 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Howard Campbell, Jr.]I'm not able to find Dr. Francis's original critique of Tom Chittum's scenario--it was evidently published in the June, 1998 newsletter of Americans for Self-Determination.
Here's the response of Jeff Anderson, President of AFSD, to Sam's article:**
June 6, 1998
Jeff Anderson Americans for Self-Determination PO Box 1143 Falls Church VA 22041-1143
ON CIVIL WAR ll
I have a few thoughts on the Sam Francis critique of CIVIL WAR II IN THE June issue. Sam's major criticism of Chittum's ghastly scenario is that the power elites will not let it happen, but rather, with utter contempt for Middle America, will ride them all the way down to Brazilianization. I think he is over- estimating the power of establishment propaganda and underestimating the American people. There are growing danger signs for the regime, as polls show a shrinking minority of people trust the government to do the right thing, compared to a large majority three decades ago. It's beginning to dawn on them how the two party con game works and how far advanced their own dispossession is. Given a few foreign policy disasters, i.e., unmanageable wars, and some serious economic problems, which is not at all farfetched, the country might be ready for a nationalist party of a Buchananite stamp. Granted, the manipulators have been able so far to shut out such a message, but for how long? There is some genuine fear and hysterics among the elites today that wasn't present a few years ago. The main assumption of the second amendment is that an honest and loyal government should have nothing to fear from an armed citizenry, but the elites are in a panic to disarm Middle America. The manipulators appear to be much less confident in their powers than Sam is. Ho-hum. Manipulators are never confidant in their powers, that's what keeps them on their toes. Stalin worried about plots constantly, from the far-reaches of his imagination. Even though no one ever had people better cowed than him.
I don't pay as much attention to WN mythology as I should, but here you have the two contrasted fairly definitively. Paleoconservatives (faleoconservatives :rolleyes: ) like Kalb and Francis, vs. WN's like Chittum , Anderson. WN's like Linder rely on these guys work to justify waiting for the inevitable spontaneous armed white uprising, and other apocalyptic scenarios.
Basically they differ in the capabilities of the American people. I think WN's rather irrationally conclude that the American people are a couple of orders above the basic degeneracy and mindless escapism which characterizes WN's as a group, where as the paleoconservatives are more realistic, recognizing how hard it is for a movement to transcend the decadence of its putative leaders, or dispose of them.
I think nationalist movements in the ex-communist countries had an innate advantage, as they had the help of several decades of regime work in eliminating the class of social degenerates which otherwise tend to accumulate and monopolize these movements.
[B]He argues that the ruling elites that gave us Balkanization will be able to control it, but I think not. Racial and ethnic loyalties are too strong and intractable, and as Chittum says, multiethnic empires usually die die a violent death[/B]. As Brent A. Nelson says in America Balkanized (page 68), "It is highly probable, given the trends evident in the 1990's, that at some point in the first half of the twenty-first century...an unstable mix of First World and Third World peoples, will produce a political crisis of such dimensions as to be insoluble within the traditional limits of American governance."............ [/QUOTE] Kalb notes Chittum draws too much on the Yugoslavian experience, which is pretty well born out here.
2005-09-29 17:31 | User Profile
I doubt Mr. Anderson's vision of peaceful devolution, if I understand it correctly. Societal disintegration will probably break us down to a quite primitive state, with the benefit of technology: large black or Hispanic no-go zones that resemble, well, ghettos or South African "homelands," walled-off enclaves with private utility systems populated by whites, Asians, Jews, etc. It will be interesting to see what does happen to our various governments. Will people bother to pay taxes? Pull over for the flashing lights? These things might just slide away. I'm interested in the specifics of how it will happen, like: will there still be an Internet? Where will our children go to school, if at all? How will our cultural legacies --- art and architecture, libraries, the English language --- be preserved (recalling the monks of the medieval period)? What will happen to our money system? Will dollars be worthless? We will all start using Euros? Food/farming co-ops?
Or, will life churn along as always, with the changes being so gradual that nobody notices much or protests anything?
Who knows.
2005-09-30 00:08 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Hugh Lincoln]I doubt Mr. Anderson's vision of peaceful devolution, if I understand it correctly. Societal disintegration will probably break us down to a quite primitive state, with the benefit of technology: .......
I'm interested in the specifics of how it will happen, like: will there still be an Internet? Where will our children go to school, if at all? How will our cultural legacies --- art and architecture, libraries, the English language --- be preserved (recalling the monks of the medieval period)? What will happen to our money system? Will dollars be worthless? We will all start using Euros? Food/farming co-ops?
Or, will life churn along as always, with the changes being so gradual that nobody notices much or protests anything? Who knows.[/QUOTE]Kevin MacDonald certainly disagrees with Mr. Anderson's vision of peaceful devolution also.
[QUOTE]There is thus a significant possibility that individualistic societies are unlikely to survive the intra- societal group-based competition that has become increasingly common and intellectually respectable in the United States. [B]I believe that in the United States we are presently heading down a volatile path--a path that leads to ethnic warfare and to the development of collectivist, authoritarian, and racialist enclaves.[/B] Although ethnocentric beliefs and behavior are viewed as morally and intellectually legitimate only among ethnic minorities in the United States, the theory and the data presented in SAID indicate that the development of greater ethnocentrism among European-derived peoples is a likely result of present trends. [/QUOTE]
MacDonald basically says we are heading into new uncharted waters, where not only peace, but the survival of a lot of the other basic liberties and priviledges we now take for granted are likely. I certainly doubt that our state governments are going to do it all on their own.