tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post4859860020042230292..comments2024-03-28T17:49:27.846-04:00Comments on Daniel Greenfield / Sultan Knish Articles at DanielGreenfield.org : We Are Those Who Stand for the DayDaniel Greenfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13575285186581875356noreply@blogger.comBlogger56125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-65595642311656668012012-11-07T08:14:47.218-05:002012-11-07T08:14:47.218-05:00Daniel, your article Game Called on Account of Dar...Daniel, your article <a href="http://sultanknish.blogspot.cz/2012/11/game-called-on-account-of-darkness.html" rel="nofollow">Game Called on Account of Darkness</a> answers my poorly formulated point perfectly, thank you.<br /><br /><i>"A movement needs a deeper sense of passion. It must be fueled by a certainty that it holds the answer to the problems of its society and its civilization. It must believe that its existence would be necessary even if the left did not exist. And it must be willing to do anything to win."</i>Leohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09675076348134024844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-56317940535447987722012-11-06T10:11:06.698-05:002012-11-06T10:11:06.698-05:00@Leo
Very lame dude. I'm actually trying to h...@Leo<br /><br />Very lame dude. I'm actually trying to have a conversation here, and you brush of my entire comment with an 'Oops'.<br /><br />You're like a right wing version of a liberal. <br /><br />Even though you decided to totally ignore my comment, I won't ignore the one you aimed at Daniel Greenfield because I actually have things to say -my mind doesn't go blank.<br /><br /><br />>One side is totally peaceful, all about love and compassion and tolerance. It has no grand schemes or manifestos or visions, just homes and families and friends. Fair enough.<br /><br />Ok, if you are NOT a practicing Christian, then I'm shocked. I'm not going to compare the 'Christian right' in the US to the Muslims in the Islamic world, because the Muslims are way worse, but, to call the Christians benign is a joke. They are anything but tolerant, compassionate and loving. True that they are peaceful, but that doesn't hide the fact that they have absolutely abhorrent views, and nothing will convince me that if given a lot of political power, they will very quickly become 'non-peaceful'. History has shown that religion and politics ALWAYS creates bloodshed one way or another.<br />As for no grand schemes or designs...lol dude, have you even read the Bible? It is just as 'grand scheming' and 'grand designing' as the communist manifesto, if not even more.<br />(If you're not a Christian you might be Jewish?)<br /><br /><br /><br />>This is where not having grand schemes or manifestos part seems to contradict survival logic and instincts and common sense. And kind of glorifying the virtue of not having them too.<br /><br />The best way to fight fanaticism is with reason and intelligence.<br />This is a case of when fire cannot be fought with fire.<br /><br />Though you (and your side) have clearly shown you have neither reason nor intelligence. Probably a factor in why your side is losing. If the idiotic left is winning, I shudder to think how idiotic the right must be.<br /><br /><br /><br />-Strahinja<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-77294692371289753962012-11-06T08:04:04.435-05:002012-11-06T08:04:04.435-05:00DG: "We have no grand schemes or manifestos, ...DG: "We have no grand schemes or manifestos, no glorious visions of caliphates and socialist republics, our vision is of our homes and our stores, our families and our friends, the communities that we have built and the small things that we have done every day of our lives for the sake of all these things."<br /><br />Houston, we may have a problem here. Just follow my logic:<br /><br />One side is totally peaceful, all about love and compassion and tolerance. It has no grand schemes or manifestos or visions, just homes and families and friends. Fair enough.<br /><br />But, the other side (one or more groups) is quite different. It is all about grandiosity. It is arrogant audacious nasty militant. It is about winning no matter what. And it keeps pushing.<br /><br />The question is, by the time the Overton Window (set of publicly acceptable policies) shifted so far to the left - will there be any significant part of the traditional society still standing?<br /><br />Yes, I remember the good news, that in 2-3 generations the brave new regime will inevitably crumble (surprise-surprise). But I also remember the bad news, that by that time the societal degradation is likely to be irreversible.<br /><br />This is where not having grand schemes or manifestos part seems to contradict survival logic and instincts and common sense. And kind of glorifying the virtue of not having them too.<br />Leohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09675076348134024844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-29758685161736067422012-11-06T02:51:51.538-05:002012-11-06T02:51:51.538-05:00Oops. The style and substance of some fellow comme...Oops. The style and substance of some fellow commenters bear troubling similarities to trolling.<br /><br />~LeoLeohttp://blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-20097010112972677442012-11-05T10:42:00.865-05:002012-11-05T10:42:00.865-05:00@Leo
I said: This idea of obedience and submissi...@Leo<br /><br /><br />I said: This idea of obedience and submission to a higher power, when translated into a secular variant, is exactly what allowed the Nazi's and Communists to rise to power.<br /><br />You said: It maybe so, but still seeking a higher power is inherent to human nature, whether you like it or not. And changing or moaning about human nature is not my favorite pastime.<br /><br />My reply: The fact you so easily dismissed the fact that this 'religious thinking' can and does give rise to totalitarian movements is actually rather frightening.<br />Furthermore, you say it is part of human nature. Well I say it isn't because I and many other people do not need or seek a higher power.<br /><br />But suppose you are right though, but by your own definition seeking a 'utopia' and ruining the world to create it is also part of human nature. <br /><br />So now what? <br /><br /><br /><br />>And, having rejected literally everything in sight, I guess one still needs something to hold on to, something better that the urge to prove his point by claiming unfounded superiority or moral high ground, talking down to people etc. I just fail to see what that something might be.<br /><br />If you don't see anything else to 'hold on to' other than religious or utopian delusion (both totalitarian by nature) then that is your problem and speaks more about you than it does about me or anyone else.<br /><br /><br /><br />-Strahinja<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />-Strahinja<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-68544835560736592452012-11-05T09:25:38.972-05:002012-11-05T09:25:38.972-05:00@Strahinja
> you seem to think anything to do ...@Strahinja<br /><br />> you seem to think anything to do with reform or progress is inherently something that stems from marxism or liberalism-progressivism<br /><br />No, nothing of the kind.<br /><br />> You seem to think western conservatism/Christianity existed since day one …<br /><br />No, your assumption is unfounded.<br /><br />> I don't understand why you seem to be afraid of change<br /><br />Wrong again. I am not afraid of change, as long as it does not come by force from some delusional fanatic, from his bright past (Islam) or from his bright future (progressivism), or from any other source for that matter, claiming he knows better, and to that end deluding, deceiving, brainwashing, subjugating, murdering people. "Hope and change" of that kind usually quickly mutates into "hype and chains" (what else it can possibly mutate into). So, there are different types of "change". Which is, incidentally, one of the main points of this article.<br /><br />> This idea of obedience and submission to a higher power, when translated into a secular variant, is exactly what allowed the Nazi's and Communists to rise to power.<br /><br />It maybe so, but still seeking a higher power is inherent to human nature, whether you like it or not. And changing or moaning about human nature is not my favorite pastime.<br /><br />> To me, Judeo-Christianity and marxist-liberal progressivism are part of one package. Two sides of the same coin. And I reject both of them.<br /><br />And, having rejected literally everything in sight, I guess one still needs something to hold on to, something better that the urge to prove his point by claiming unfounded superiority or moral high ground, talking down to people etc. I just fail to see what that something might be.<br /><br />> As for keeping the wisdom we have acquired through centuries/millennia, you'll have to explain what you mean by 'wise'. What exactly you are referring to.<br /><br />I am satisfied with the sum of well known and widely available definitions. I hope you can be too.<br /><br />> Judaism is kind of irrelevant IMO<br /><br />Oh yes, what they understand, those fellas. Just survived six great civilizations and still standing. Move on people, nothing to see here.<br /><br />~LeoAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-64537582998407417942012-11-05T02:16:50.456-05:002012-11-05T02:16:50.456-05:00@lemon lime moon:
Abrahamic religion = Judaism, C...@lemon lime moon:<br /><br />Abrahamic religion = Judaism, Christianity, Islam and the Bahai faith.<br /><br />I'm not interested which one has the 'legitimate' claim to Abraham. Religious theological sectarianism is of no importance to me and I don't care who believes they are the 'right religion'; they all claim the same descent and they all offer the same underlying philosophy and they all produce the same results, albeit in different degrees, and that is all that matters.<br /><br />Your attitude is EXACTLY the problem. <br /><br />Your last sentence makes no sense. <br /><br />"If we did obey a higher power, we would not be in the mess we are in."<br /><br />Thats the problem, obedience. How that point eluded you is a mystery to me.<br /><br /><br />-StrahinjaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-82124388094602952672012-11-05T01:44:14.869-05:002012-11-05T01:44:14.869-05:00There is only one Abrahamic religion. One.
And no ...There is only one Abrahamic religion. One.<br />And no one on this earth save a few righteous souls were ever 'obsessed' with obeying a higher power. <br />If they did obey a higher power, we would not be in the mess we are in.Chana @ Lemon Lime Moonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11656854855385193867noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-39587769210728921802012-11-04T21:11:57.387-05:002012-11-04T21:11:57.387-05:00@Leo: Part 3
It is the underlying mentality and p...@Leo: Part 3<br /><br />It is the underlying mentality and philosophy inherent in all 3 Abrahamic religions which I have an issue with. Not only are all 3 utopian, but all three have an obsession with obedience to a higher power. And, they are all actually wrong about what they claim. They are just not very intelligent philosophies. <br /><br />So to call me a progressive liberal is out of place, because I do not believe in a utopia of any form, nor do I believe in blind obedience to a higher power, nor do I expect to place my belief in something that is divorced from this world. The marxists/liberals/progressives of the world are all nothing but secularized Christians/Jews.<br />The underlying philosophy of both is pretty much the same. <br /><br />To me, Judeo-Christianity and Marxist-liberal progressivism are part of one package. Two sides of the same coin. And I reject both of them.<br /><br />As for keeping the wisdom we have acquired through centuries/millennia whatever you want to call it, you'll have to explain what you mean by 'wise'. What exactly you are referring to.<br /><br />Whatever in Judaism/Christianity is wisdom, is true because it is simply true, not because it came from Judaism or Christianity.<br />It would still be true if you rejected Judaism and Christianity. <br /><br />I brought Christianity into the discussion because it is impossible to have this discussion without it. Both 'the right' and 'the left' are offspring of the philosophy underlying Christianity (and Judaism).<br />The right and left are brothers. <br /><br /><br />Finally, I don't understand why you seem to be afraid of change. I made it clear in this comment that I reject all forms of utopianism, but not change.<br /><br />And you are hypocritical because the 'present' you are defending was at a time itself extremely radical against the order it was offering itself as an alternative to -but you seem to not realize that.<br />You seem to think western conservatism/Christianity existed since day 1 when it didn't.<br /><br /><br />Put it this way dude, if I walked into a room, and on the table in the middle of the room, there was a bunch of books, say the Torah, the Bible, the Quran, Mein Kampf, the Communist Manifesto, Hindu scriptures, etc etc.<br />I wouldn't pick one and claim it is the truth against all others.<br /><br />I'd read them all and see what they are all about because I'm just a naturally curious person. <br /><br />I sincerely believe that reality cannot be fully captured into one 'system of thought'. It's like trying to put all of reality into a bottle and tightly shutting the lid.<br /><br /><br />It's why I don't like being called a progressive-liberal, because I despise them as much as I despise their Christian and Islamic versions.<br />To me they are literally the 'same shit, different smell'.<br /><br /><br />-StrahinjaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-18587654263802200122012-11-04T21:11:25.885-05:002012-11-04T21:11:25.885-05:00@Leo: Part 2
Point is, all four of them are utopi...@Leo: Part 2<br /><br />Point is, all four of them are utopian in their thinking. The only difference is that the secular two (Nazism and Communism) claim it can be achieved on earth through human effort.<br />While the other two claim it will happen on earth by God's will (not human effort), and Christianity at least claims it already exists in the after life (i.e. heaven).<br />But all 4 are utopian, although the nature of their 'utopia' is different.<br />But, as I said, all 4 are utopian.<br /><br />Which is why I find it absurd to be a Christian or a Jew (or a Muslim for that matter), and decry any form of utopianism (such as the liberal-progressive one we have today), when utopianism itself is such an explicitly religious urge, and all secular ideologies offering a utopian future are merely degenerated and secular versions of the religions that proceeded before them.<br />Is it any surprise Marxism emerged from a Christian culture? Hardly.<br />I reject ALL forms of utopianism, secular and religious.<br /><br />What makes me 'unhappy' about western conservatism being tied to Judaism and Christianity? <br /><br />Apart from the utopian elements ingrained in both (as I explained above), also the fact that they are both actually wrong about the claims they make about reality, and the very core of both of them is submission and obedience to God.<br />My main issue is actually with Christianity and Islam, and less so Judaism, because even though Judaism gave birth to both Christianity and Islam, it is actually the latter two that have caused the most miserly and damage. Judaism is kind of irrelevant IMO.<br />This idea of obedience and submission to a higher power, when translated into a secular variant, is exactly what allowed the Nazi's and Communists to rise to power.<br />Replace the Church with the State.<br />Replace the Clergy with the Party.<br />Replace the Pope/Patriarch/Tsar with the Leader.<br />Replace 'God' with whatever other absolute has been found, whether it be dialectical materialism, scientific socialism, or scientific racialism or whatever.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-13885125165736481422012-11-04T21:10:51.112-05:002012-11-04T21:10:51.112-05:00@Leo: Part 1
I'm irritated because you seem t...@Leo: Part 1<br /><br />I'm irritated because you seem to think anything to do with reform or progress is inherently something that stems from marxism or liberalism-progressivsm. So I'll put it this way.<br /><br />Utopianism = the belief in a perfect world. A paradise. All we need to do is destroy absolutely everything we have now, and this paradise will arrive tomorrow.<br />-This, i explicitly REJECT. I do not accept any sort of utopianism.<br />I know it is impossible, and trying to create a paradise on earth will only create a hell on earth. Nazism and Communism are two shinning examples.<br />But, take Christianity and Judaism. Christianity offers a utopian vision of an afterlife. Sure, it's not 'on earth', but it still has a utopian promise.<br />And both Judaism and Christianity offer a utopia that will occur on earth after the end times. <br />Nazism and Communism wanted a utopia on earth, and they wanted it as soon as it could be arranged.<br />Christianity offers a utopia as soon as you are dead, and Judaism and Christianity both offer a utopia in some distant future that will arrive on its own.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-74975515630850627932012-11-04T19:26:12.865-05:002012-11-04T19:26:12.865-05:00@Strahinja: I don't understand why are you so ...@Strahinja: I don't understand why are you so irritated or disappointed. I did not play word games, did not praise "modernization" in the former USSR, did not admire "radicals" of all times, did not mention Christianity or another religion - you did.<br /><br />So, it would be hardly a stretch for me to assume some sort of association or alignment with marxist-socialist-communist-liberal-progressive ideas or methods on your side.<br /><br />Conservatism in the western sense is tied not only to Christianity, but to Judaism too. So what, what makes you so unhappy about that?<br /><br />I don't mind learning more about your principles, if you care to explain. And yes, I don't really realize how hypocritical I am, perhaps you can explain that too.<br /><br />~LeoAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-23971822562763384122012-11-04T18:01:35.295-05:002012-11-04T18:01:35.295-05:00@Leo:
How funny, on facebook people say I'm t...@Leo:<br /><br />How funny, on facebook people say I'm too conservative, on here people call me a liberal.<br /><br />Dude, I'm not even a westerner. Don't apply your crappy left/right labels to me. I despise both of them.<br /><br /><br />I'm still really annoyed at th face that you don't realize how hypocritical you are. Christianity is the religion of choice for conservatives, yet did you forget how radical it was at the time of its inception?<br />Or was the world fundamentally screwed up before jesus came along?<br /><br />It's just lame, that 'conservatism' in the western sense is inherently tied to Christianity. I bet if you were an Arab you'd say Islam has served us well for 1400 years so why ruin that.<br /><br />You don't realize the principle behind what I'm saying; you get caught up in the specifics. <br />I never said ditch what works. No idea where you got that from.<br /><br /><br /><br />-Strahinja<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-35808379937551515152012-11-04T14:50:27.610-05:002012-11-04T14:50:27.610-05:00It has always struck me that conservatives are at ...It has always struck me that conservatives are at an inherent political disadvantage. The default ethos modernity is to "do something." The idea of abstaining from action, particularly political action, of behalf of a purported "problem" or the oppressed grievance group du jour, barely registers. As Daniel mentions - and I want to add emphasis here - it is the conflation of technical know-how and social/political "science" which fuels the utopian fire. The technological ability to manipulate physical matter which radically improved the standard of living for billions, is staggering and awe-inspiring.<br /><br />Unfortunately, this success has also engendered the belief that technocratic means can be successfully applied to societies in order to perfect them. This hubris among our so-called elites fuels the utopian impulse, so well described by Daniel. This belief is impervious to empirical evidence, and so must be categorized as a religious faith. Some might think that the Soviet experiment is sufficient proof of the bankruptcy of this faith. An even fuller refutation can be found in most history books or "Death by Government" by R.J. Rummel. I wish I could be as optimistic as Daniel that "it won't happen here." Are you aware that various agencies of the federal government (including the Social Security Administration!) recently purchased about 500 million rounds of hollow point ammunition? As these rounds are outlawed for warfare, for whom are they intended?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-50839152305963544592012-11-04T04:14:06.515-05:002012-11-04T04:14:06.515-05:00Liberal-progressives are good at word games.
Call...Liberal-progressives are good at word games.<br /><br />Call something you dislike or reject "archaic", "backward", "fossilized", "superstitious" - and suddenly you are a cool dude, fighting for "social progress", breaking "societal chains", or admiring those who do, praising "radicals" etc.<br /><br />Call some group of reasonable common-sense people "reactionaries against progress" or "mad dogs which must be exterminated", or and suddenly it is much easier psychologically to murder them en masse.<br /><br /><b>Conservatism is the idea that centuries of human wisdom should not be thrown out the window for the sake of "change".</b><br /><br />I am not sure who coined this expression, I suspect the roots may go deep in time, and I personally would replace "centuries" with "millennia", but that's beyond the point.<br /><br />The point is that I believe when Daniel talks about "preserving the present", he means exactly that, and not any sort of "conservation" per se. <br /><br />The cool dudes, talking about their disdain of "fossilization", belong to those ideologically driven Western progressives, mentioned in Daniel's article, whether they realize it or not it's another story.<br /><br />~LeoAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-39597036515075015822012-11-04T00:24:28.102-04:002012-11-04T00:24:28.102-04:00@IguanaDonna
Since you jumped from 'reformer&...@IguanaDonna<br /><br />Since you jumped from 'reformer' to Nazi's in a single step, I'll do the same in expaining what fossilization is.<br /><br />You get a supposed revelation from Allah in the 7th century. Then for the next couple of centuries you expand your knowledge as much as possible in-line with Allah's revelation, and then in the 11th century you forbid absolutely any new knowledge, progress, reform or innovation, and literally freeze society. You set it in stone. It becomes a living zombie.<br /><br />That is fossilization. If that is what you prefer, why don't you go live with the Amish, or even the Muslims. They prefer fossilization to progress as well. Allah/God forbid we make any changes to anything!<br /><br /><br />-StrahinjaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-56735964308265671062012-11-04T00:09:26.534-04:002012-11-04T00:09:26.534-04:00Strahinja, anybody can be a "Reformer". ...Strahinja, anybody can be a "Reformer". The Nazis claimed to be reformers. The communists claimed to be reformers. <br /><br />What they actually accomplished was war, and the butchery of millions. <br /><br />Some reform. <br /><br />Every ghastly tyranny in the 20th Century started out by promising to reform something, or help a certain group of people (the Aryans, the Proletariat, etc.), or to achieve some worthy goal (equality, "Racial purity", etc.)<br /><br />Better "fossilization" (whatever THAT means!) than some bold, wonderful, splendiferous new reformation, that results in concentration camps, and the deaths of millions. <br /><br />Reformers are not always good for society. <br /><br />/IguanaDonna <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-67579276900017142822012-11-03T19:47:22.662-04:002012-11-03T19:47:22.662-04:00Just finished this and, for some reason retrieved ...Just finished this and, for some reason retrieved my dusty copy of Ferlinghetti's <i><br />A coney Island of the mind"</i> to re-read <i>"I Am Waiting".</i> I don't know why.<br /><br />Bill in AZnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-14022396469224747522012-11-03T18:53:32.430-04:002012-11-03T18:53:32.430-04:00Is it remotely possible for all of you very smart ...Is it remotely possible for all of you very smart intellectual people-- to stop squabbling and pissing over words and the way they are used in your posts? The real questions is what to WE (USA) do now?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-89757005626129869632012-11-03T17:06:27.718-04:002012-11-03T17:06:27.718-04:00*disagree with Daniel Greenfield's assertion
...*disagree with Daniel Greenfield's assertion<br /><br />(spelling error)<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-53030505399155318192012-11-03T17:05:12.544-04:002012-11-03T17:05:12.544-04:00@Anonymous: I'll grant you that. You very well...@Anonymous: I'll grant you that. You very well good be right about the bolsheviks actually retarding progress by not letting the liberalization of political power continue. I could be wrong on that, but what you say makes sense. The example of communism I used might of been a bad example, but its besides my point because my point is that:<br /><br />It is the 'radicals' who make change happen, not the 'worshippers of today'.<br />I don't even like calling them radicals or utopians, perhaps 'reformer' is a better term. Someone who realizes that the way things are, are not necessarily good, or that they can be better.<br /><br />I just agree with Daniel Greenfield in his assertion that those who push for change are 'dislocated in mind', and that its best to 'stand for today'.<br /><br />I say that change comes from those who are 'dislocated in mind', and that it is hypocritical to criticize reformers when the conservatives (today-worshippers) are enjoying the benefits of the work of reformers of the past. I gave examples of the plane vs the ship, the car vs the horse and carriage, and the revolutionary USA vs old Europe.<br /><br />Furthermore, with the example of Russia again, even if the communists were retarding Russia, the Tsarist-Orthodox forces were no better. They held onto the 'today' just as much as religious fanatics in our time do.<br />The Tsarist-Orthodox forces had nothing new at all to offer, except the same stories and icons that have existed for centuries. The same as 'today-worshippers' right now, usually backed by religion.<br /><br />I'm just saying reformers are good for society, and blindly being conservative, refusing tomorrow, sitting down in a today and fossilizing, is just as stupid as blindly chasing a 'permanent tomorrow', which the utopians are doing.<br /><br />I hope that makes my view more clear. <br /><br />-StrahinjaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-63458722620658848632012-11-03T16:39:09.818-04:002012-11-03T16:39:09.818-04:00@Strahinja,
That is a popular idea, but yoou are ...@Strahinja,<br /><br />That is a popular idea, but yoou are mistaken. Russian reform and modernization were retarded, but had taken off, and during the last two decades before WW I, Russia experienced not only the beginnings of painful political liberalization and weakening of autocratic power, but also saw the beginning and growth of a modern insdustrial base. Had it not been for the war and revolution, Russia would have caught up with the modern world a full generation earlier than it did. Lenin's bolsheviks destroyed and murdered more than did the great war itself, and then delayed recovery.<br />-RurikAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-67809568474698838372012-11-03T14:20:39.964-04:002012-11-03T14:20:39.964-04:00@Richard:
You believe in Jesus, and you side with...@Richard:<br /><br />You believe in Jesus, and you side with Muslims, over the Christian Serbs, who were actually the anti-Nazi's in WW2 and were fighting AGAINST the former Nazi allies during the Yugoslav war?<br /><br />You actually deserve to be crucified by Muslims for being a filthy ingrate. <br /><br />Jebi si picko. jebe cu ti sunsa iz neba drkadzija jedan. idi umri. isus hrist te mrzi. gori ces u pakao u muhamad ce da te jebe i zakolji. etc.<br /><br />Fuck you.<br /><br />-Strahinja <br /><br />P.S: I'm no longer going to respond to your Serbophobic fascistic shit. You might as well be an anti-semite while you're at it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-48611392223035496962012-11-03T14:00:49.232-04:002012-11-03T14:00:49.232-04:00All I know is that it is the automatic default set...All I know is that it is the automatic default setting for Serb Nazis to refer to anyone who tells the truth about them to call them Muslims. Well, madam, sieg hiel to you. Christ knows me for who I am. He also, alas for you, knows you. I suggest deep repentance and long term silence.<br /><br />I saw what the Serbs did with my own eyes and helped (in a tiny way) to bury the dead they left behind.<br /><br />And yes, I know Serbian. Perhaps you are familiar with the English tradition of calling a male a female to imply naked cowardice? (And shooting 5000 people with their hands tied behind their backs is naked cowardice....)Richard L. Kent, Esq.http://michigansilverback.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11368628.post-13118818731784713032012-11-03T12:11:14.511-04:002012-11-03T12:11:14.511-04:00Why are the dates of the posts in the European for...Why are the dates of the posts in the European format?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com