Likelihood of Success

Ron Coleman’s pretty good blog

Archive for the ‘Euroids’ Category

Putinism

Posted by Ron Coleman on December 23, 2007

Zenpundit writes at Chicago Boyz about Retro-Authoritarianism in Russia:

After periods of disorder, want or uncertainty there have always been many people who are all too willing to trade liberty for economic security.

Whenever authoritarianism has the added attraction of marshaling competence and cultural values behind its standard, democrats should beware.

I’ve been being ‘ware for a while now.

Posted in Euroids, Past is prologue, Stragety | 2 Comments »

Britain’s new Jew hatred

Posted by Ron Coleman on November 5, 2007

Melanie Phillips, via Instapundit:

One of the most conspicuous features of British anti-Semitism is that the British deny its existence. The Parliamentary inquiry received only a muted response. Both Mann and Richard Littlejohn, a journalist whose TV program on the subject aired in July 2007, encountered people who, when discovering their concern about anti-Semitism, said: “Oh, I didn’t know you were Jewish.” But Mann and Littlejohn aren’t Jewish. As Littlejohn noted, the implication was that no non-Jew would ever identify anti-Semitism, and therefore that anti-Semitism was generally a figment of the Jewish imagination. When I proposed to write a book about it, I was turned down by every mainstream publishing house. “No British publisher will touch this,” one editorial director told me. “Claiming there is anti-Semitism in Britain is simply unsayable.” . . .

Britons also tend to suspect that Jews use the charge of anti-Semitism to divert attention from Israel’s crimes. This is why, for so many in Britain, the suggestion that anti-Semitism is enjoying a renaissance seems not only false but sinister. Outraged to be accused of peddling bigotry, they begin to hate those who level that charge—who, they conclude, are part of a conspiracy against truth.

This is a long-time beat for Melanie Phillips, but in fact there is nothing at all controversial in what she is saying (i.e., the facts she cites) except as to her conclusion. Anyone observing what has happened in Western Europe for the last five to ten years knows it, and in the Jewish community it is well known that England and France are simply not hospitable to Jews, at least not conspicuous Jews, any more.

Phillips also notes the coded use of the term “neoconservatives” to refer to the “Jewish conspiracy,” a transparent phenomenon that nonetheless is consistently ignored even by Jews who, like the self-satisfied Britons and Frenchmen who are above bigotry, would rather not admit what is happening.  (UPDATE:  Maybe ignored a little less.)

It’s somewhat scary. Vigilance helps; but only God controls the world, and there are no obvious answers on the natural axis, anyway. It is not an extermination scenario, à la Nazi Germany; that comparison is facile, too. Anyway, it is facile to tell people living in England or France to pick up and move, despite having families, homes, communities and businesses there. And where to? Immigrating to the US is very difficult these days, unless you do it illegally — not an option for intact families with jobs, credentials and bona fides. Israel is not an option for most people; it is very difficult for people from Western civilization to adapt to, and is itself a highly polarized and stressed-out society.

The good news is that Britain and France are democracies with imperfect, but still well established, constitutional traditions. There is no telling what sort of impact a national leader willing to admit to the existence of this phenomenon in these countries, and to face it head on, could accomplish. No such leadership has been forthcoming, despite what one can only posit are the Jewish puppet-masters’ best efforts. But what other hope, in this world, is there?

Posted in Euroids, Oppression, Past is prologue | 21 Comments »

“The top US conservatives and liberals”

Posted by Ron Coleman on October 30, 2007

According to London’s Telegraph.  Quite interesting.

Posted in Euroids, Politics and Poker | Leave a Comment »

Realism from The Economist

Posted by Ron Coleman on September 19, 2007

Blame is one thing; policymaking is another. The Economist recognizes, in its cover story, what the antiwar crowd will not: The wisdom of the choice to go to war with Saddam Hussein is only slightly related to the question of what policy to pursue now:

If the case for staying depended on extrapolating from the modest gains the general claims for his surge, it would be a weak one. The strong case is that if America leaves, things will get even worse. This can only be a guess, but it is more plausible than the alternative guess that America’s going will nudge Iraq in the right direction. In the past two years, violence has tended to decline where American troops are present and to rise in the places they leave. There is no doubt that some Shia militias want to rid Baghdad of its Sunnis and that American troops are for now the only thing stopping them. Contrary to what foreigners think, most Iraqis say they oppose partition: in the BBC/ABC poll, 62% said Iraq should have a unified government and 98% said it would be a bad thing for the country to separate on sectarian lines. . . .

If America could choose again, it would not step into a civil war in Mesopotamia. But there are worse reasons than preventing a bloodbath for a superpower to put its soldiers at risk. Having invaded Iraq in its own interest—to remove mass-killing weapons that turned out not to exist—America owes something to Iraq’s people, a slim majority of whom want it to stay. It is hard to know how Iraq can be mended. At some point it may become clear the country has sunk so low it is simply beyond saving. But it is not possible to be sure of that yet.

For a bunch of Europeans, that’s pretty good.

Posted in Euroids, Orient, Stragety | 5 Comments »

Inventory this

Posted by Ron Coleman on September 4, 2007

Meryl Yourish reports that it’s getting hairy for Scientology in Western Europe.

Maybe that’s why they’re hanging around the subways in New York all the time.

Posted in Euroids, Faith and Works | Leave a Comment »

No free ride for the Bear

Posted by Ron Coleman on August 22, 2007

This is cool.  Good show!  (See earlier post on resurgent brunoism).

Posted in Euroids, Stragety | Leave a Comment »

Jerry Lewis did not design this garment

Posted by Ron Coleman on August 21, 2007

Counterfeit Chic endorses the use of garment labels to curry favor with our dear French allies:

But, of course.  Very classy, oui?

Posted in Euroids | 2 Comments »

Alleged reporting

Posted by Ron Coleman on August 19, 2007

Glenn points to LGF, which links to a Daily Mail story regarding the West’s oldest anti-semitic outlet still in operation, the BBC, to wit. “The BBC is in trouble today for once again allowing ugly antisemitic and anti-Christian slurs to remain posted at the BBC 5 message boards, while instantly deleting any criticism of Islam,” writes LGF. But here’s an odd excerpt from the Daily Mail piece:

The BBC has also been criticised for allowing allegedly anti-Semitic posts from a contributor called “Iron Naz’.

In a message left on the site for more than a month, Iron Naz says: “Zionism is a racist ideology where jews are given supremacy over all other races and faiths. This is found in the Talmud…which allows jews to lie as long as its to non-jews.”

The remarks brought complaints from the Board of Deputies, the organisation that represents Britain’s Jews and its Community Security Trust. They say the post draws on a discredited 19th Century text, the Talmud Unmasked, which is still distributed by neo-Nazi booksellers.

However, the BBC said the remarks did not merit removal.

Nice catch, but — “allegedly anti-Semitic”? What’s with the allegedly?

There will always be the English, I suppose.

Posted in Euroids, Medialites | 6 Comments »

The Last Server

Posted by Ron Coleman on July 27, 2007

“New ‘Last Supper’ theory crashes Leonardo Web sites.”

When’s the last time you actually heard of someone crashing a Seder?

mash-supper.jpg

Posted in Ars Longa, Euroids, Faith and Works | Leave a Comment »

Statute of limitations

Posted by Ron Coleman on June 14, 2007

Does World War II give us a free pass on all foreign-policy decisions for the rest of time? I don’t think so. But many hawks (I am a hawk), including Democratic Representative Tom Lantos, do. First, via James Taranto today, the perfectly good part.

“I am so glad that the era of Jacques Chirac and Chancellor Schroeder in Germany is now gone,” [California’s Rep. Tom] Lantos said to applause.

He said when the United States asked Schroeder to support its decision to go to war in Iraq “he told us where to go.”

“I referred to him as a political prostitute, now that he’s taking big checks from (Russian President Vladimir) Putin. But the sex workers in my district objected, so I will no longer use that phrase,” Lantos said. . . .

Fair enough. I like the sound of this. This Lantos, he’s a Democrat? Yes, he’s a hated “Democratic Hawk,” and indeed if there are any such things left he seems to be an excellent specimen. Oh, he co-sponsored the surrender resolution in February — yes, I guess I about get it. Anyway — here’s where he loses me:

Lantos said Chirac “should go down to the Normandy beaches. He should see those endless rows of white marble crosses and stars of David representing young Americans who gave their lives for the freedom of France.”

I’m sure that would do Chirac a world of good. But how on earth does that mean that half a century later, France is obligated to support every foreign policy choice the United States makes?

This is such an intellectually dishonest argument, and at the same time so rich in jingoism, that only a politician could make it.

I think if you roll back the obligations and chip-cashing calculus, the U.S. owes about as much to France, which made victory in the Revolutionary War possible, as France does to us. But both actions are part of history. France has its own rotten, swinish and, yes, whore-like national interests, and will pursue them as we pursue our noble, selfless ones.  So much the better if that country recognizes, as it should, that its interests in the long run are indeed closer to ours than its previous leadership has believed.

But World War II? Very old war. Way over.  Our foreign policy arguments have to be made on the merits — at least with our allies.

Posted in Euroids, Politics and Poker | 5 Comments »