Post: #1

Has anyone read this book?

Quote:Crises—political, social, and economic—run rampant within Mother Russia’s borders. Russian troops infiltrate the Crimean peninsula, the UN Security Council attempts to mediate concerning the conflict with Ukraine, and the United States pledges aid to former Soviet satellites—and civil war teeters on the brink of eruption. In the wake of the Sochi Olympics, it is Russia that is skating on thin ice, and Vladimir Putin’s autonomous regime looks shakier by the minute. Ilan Berman shows the future of the country as grim and on the fast track to complete ruination. Is the end in sight for this former superpower? In Implosion, Berman explains why Russia’s collapse is imminent and how this nation’s ultimate demise will vitiate the United States.

http://www.amazon.com/Implosion-Russia-W...roduct_top

I'm interested in demographic issues and this book seems to be very focused on Russia's growing Muslim population and the implications on Chechnya, Dagestan and similar republics in the federation. The author appears to be kind of a neocon but maybe he has some interesting ideas. Opinions?

Post: #2

Just by reading the summary and seeing who it's written by, I'm catching a whiff of propaganda.

I'm going to see if I can find the torrent or pdf.

Post: #3

Sounds interesting. I need to find the link, but this brings to mind an article about demographics comparing the USA to Russia I read recently. For all that many in the US seem to act as if on a high horse with regards to this issue, it showed how demographics in the US were declining increasingly towards what is seen in Russia, while Russia was actually improving. (Can't recall the source- it might have been from the Heritage Foundation or somewhere like that.)

Post: #4

Russia's population is on the decline. It's particluarly bad in rural areas, where people flee for the cities. It's untenable in the long run if they don't turn it around, or let in more immigrants.

Compare that to the U.S. The rednecks in my hometown are prett happy to stay at home and fuck their fat wives. They aren't going anywhere. And the birth rate in the U.S. is higher than 2, plus there are more than one million new immigrants every year. America is doing well in terms of population growth.

Post: #5

Why is population decline really a problem? How would immigration solve Russias problems?

I think if you look at Russia over the last 100 years, they really arent doing so bad right now.

Post: #6

One thing that Russia probably should have handled better is making Moscow the center of everything.

They should have made Moscow the capital, but made one city the center for business, another the center for arts, another for culture, another for sports, etc.

Japan did the same thing with Tokyo. It is too big and expensive. And smaller cities like Osaka and Kyoto are dying, at least in their traditional roles - Osaka was the center of business and Kyoto of art, but now Tokyo dominates everything.

Population decline is not so much a problem if overall life is good, and tenable long-term.

Post: #7

Always check the author's credentials. Ilan Berman is a Jewish neo-con. They typically possess the following characteristics:

1)Hatred for Russia
2)Over-the-top paranoia regarding Muslims
3)War and fear mongering

Just trying to add a little perspective. No race trolling here.

Post: #8

Tell me you would want this if you were Russian:

Post: #9

(05-19-2014 12:40 PM)RexImperator Wrote:  Sounds interesting. I need to find the link, but this brings to mind an article about demographics comparing the USA to Russia I read recently. For all that many in the US seem to act as if on a high horse with regards to this issue, it showed how demographics in the US were declining increasingly towards what is seen in Russia, while Russia was actually improving. (Can't recall the source- it might have been from the Heritage Foundation or somewhere like that.)

Here's the blog article I was thinking of:

'Dying' Russia's Birth Rate Is Now Higher Than The United States'

Quote:if you compare the most recent CDC data with Rosstat data on Russian births you see that, for the first time in a very long time, in 2012 Russia’s birth rate actually exceeded that of the United States. This is, to put it mildly, a significant reversal from the not too distant past when the US had a birth rate that was as much as 75% higher than Russia’s.

Post: #10

What Russia has going for it compared to the rest of Europe is a strong sense of ethnic and national identity. Russia is still a country for the Russians. This puts them at an advantage when compared to France or Scandinavia in dealing with both Muslim migration and the western/feminist/globalist/culture destroying virus.

Post: #11

I suppose Russia's positive birth rate is due to the Muslim areas like Dagestan or Chechnya, where women are having more than 3 kids and distort the statistic. I doubt that the birth rate for ethnic Slavics is equally high.

Post: #12

(05-28-2014 01:19 PM)Flint Wrote:  I suppose Russia's positive birth rate is due to the Muslim areas like Dagestan or Chechnya, where women are having more than 3 kids and distort the statistic. I doubt that the birth rate for ethnic Slavics is equally high.

Yes, mostly Caucasus and Turkic regions have very high birthrate. But that is not the problem. The problem is that ethnic Slav people have below replacement rate birth rates. It doesn't stop there. Ethnic slav also have high death rate because of overconsuption of alcohol and a lot of ethnic Russians are moving to western countries. Probably soon Russia will collapse because of internal struggles.

Post: #13

(05-20-2014 12:25 PM)durangotang Wrote:  Tell me you would want this if you were Russian:

Is it like this every day?

Post: #14

Russia is a strange one, in some ways they have a lot of potential and in other ways not at all. They can't abide by the same liberal values that the West are trying to promote. For the reasons mentioned in the OP's post.

We have to look at the history however, the three big events which damaged this rich country.

October revolution) Lenin killed off the high achievers and innovators.

Second World War) 25 million people were killed, I repeat 25 million Russians were killed. So the new innovators created and moulded by Lenin, were wiped out in this event.

The fall of the USSR) This was the final straw, which saw the innovative smart Russians, leaving the place rapidly.

I don't understand why nations such as Denmark, Russia, Serbia; who realise that they have a demographic crisis, do not initiate economic policies that are seen in Israel. The Israeli's have a strong sense of ethnic and national pride, they give tax cuts and actual money to married families for every child they have on the settlements. The Israeli jews are actually having more kids than the Palestinian Muslims.

I see Russia as a sad case, because they have a lot of potential, their history is rich, although they have always been held back in one way or another. If you look at the genetic/long term repercussions of having revolutions, which wiped out the smartest, strongest people; it gets worrying.

Post: #15

(05-20-2014 12:10 PM)Cunnilinguist Wrote:  Always check the author's credentials. Ilan Berman is a Jewish neo-con. They typically possess the following characteristics:

1)Hatred for Russia
2)Over-the-top paranoia regarding Muslims
3)War and fear mongering

Just trying to add a little perspective. No race trolling here.

The Jewish neo-con playbook goes something like this:

If a foreign country has ever shown signs of antisemitism, publicly predict the country's demise in a tone of false-pity. Assure the audience that the downfall is inevitable and cannot be helped. Typical culprits for downfall are low population growth or domestic Muslim population growth.

A very high proportion of supposedly hawkish or conservative Jews in America have exactly this mentality. You can see it in how they're quick to predict the demise of a country like France thanks to its Muslims, but also shun any active solutions to the issue, eg putting nationalists into power. Because they secretly believe that the only choice is domination by Muslims or neo-Nazis or a collapse altogether, so they're pining for collapse. They fear and hate the historic dominant ethnicity from staking its claim to its homeland, cuz some Jews might get hurt (even though most of the actual anti-semitic violence in say, France, comes from Muslims) and those people are really Nazis deep down anyway, so they deserve it.

Also, Ilan is a Hebrew name - I'd bet that the author grew up in an Orthodox or Orthodox-lite home where views like what I've written above are very prevalent. He's probably not Israeli - Israelis don't quite have the neo-con view as I've described it, at least not that I've seen.

Post: #16

^^ Excellent write-up and extremely succinct. The neocons secretly cheer the demise of Russia, France, etc. I wonder if they realize that it was the Soviet Army that liberated Auschwitz?

Post: #17

Yet, neo-con Jews are some of the biggest nationalists around. Leo Strauss, etc. Neo-con Jews are more friend than enemy, it's the other 80% of Jews you have to worry about.

Post: #18

"Yet, neo-con Jews are some of the biggest nationalists around."

If by nationalist you mean imperialist, yes. Otherwise, no, hardly. Neocon Jews are mostly silent on immigration. And even the neocon Jews are quick to treat a revival of Christianity and the absence of white guilt as a cosmic prelude to Nazism. The thinking goes, "well because I'm a descendant of immigrants, saying no to immigrants is like rejecting my grandfather, so who am I to reject someone else?" And "if we say no to illegal immigrants and Muslim foreigners, it won't be long until the Goyim come after us. Hate one, hate them all." Silly, yes, but strikingly common, including among neocon Jews. It's possible the younger ones are less reflexively anti-Christian.

Like I said, if these Jews were authentically nationalist, they would be applauding European nationalist parties, at least the ones without a strong specter of Nazism like Golden Dawn and Jobbik. With the exception of Geert Wilders, they haven't.

To be fair, the rank and file Jewish neocons that I've known can be bought off with 'support for Israel' whatever that means - the real danger lies in the neocon pundits (and liberal dogooders) convincing the government that it should stroll into the Sudan or Syria to mend things.

Post: #19

I think Samseau was referring to their nationalistic support for Israel, while denying the right of self-determination to everyone else

Post: #20

(05-30-2014 07:09 PM)Basil Ransom Wrote:  "Yet, neo-con Jews are some of the biggest nationalists around."

If by nationalist you mean imperialist, yes. Otherwise, no, hardly. Neocon Jews are mostly silent on immigration. And even the neocon Jews are quick to treat a revival of Christianity and the absence of white guilt as a cosmic prelude to Nazism. The thinking goes, "well because I'm a descendant of immigrants, saying no to immigrants is like rejecting my grandfather, so who am I to reject someone else?" And "if we say no to illegal immigrants and Muslim foreigners, it won't be long until the Goyim come after us. Hate one, hate them all." Silly, yes, but strikingly common, including among neocon Jews. It's possible the younger ones are less reflexively anti-Christian.

Like I said, if these Jews were authentically nationalist, they would be applauding European nationalist parties, at least the ones without a strong specter of Nazism like Golden Dawn and Jobbik. With the exception of Geert Wilders, they haven't.

To be fair, the rank and file Jewish neocons that I've known can be bought off with 'support for Israel' whatever that means - the real danger lies in the neocon pundits (and liberal dogooders) convincing the government that it should stroll into the Sudan or Syria to mend things.

You are absolutely 100% correct however, in that Jewish neo-cons will support Israel over everyone else.

I retract my original statement. Thinking about it more, I was wrong. Neocons are not the friends of western civilization, especially because of the Jewish influence.

Still, I see neocons as far smaller threats than the socialists and progressives on the left. The neocons can be co-opted into nationalist movements if it means more support for Israel, whereas there is no bargaining with the left.

Post: #21

(05-31-2014 12:58 PM)Samseau Wrote:  You are absolutely 100% correct however, in that Jewish neo-cons will support Israel over everyone else.

I retract my original statement. Thinking about it more, I was wrong.

Very honorable of you - most people nowadays are too conceited and insecure to publicly change their opinion (except Obama 'evolving' on gay marriage...).

(05-31-2014 12:58 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Neocons are not the friends of western civilization, especially because of the Jewish influence.

Still, I see neocons as far smaller threats than the socialists and progressives on the left. The neocons can be co-opted into nationalist movements if it means more support for Israel, whereas there is no bargaining with the left.

Personally, I would not go that far. I would say it depends on how neocons are affecting policy. If they are merely promoting a friendly stance towards Israel, that does not extend to foreign invasions supposedly in Israel's interest, then neocons can be a strong contribution to the right, with their money and punditry. The trouble with that is neocons rarely are content with just pro-Israel sentiment. The Republican and Democratic parties are funded by Jews to the tune of 25% and 50% or more, and you can assume some of that is from highly pro-Israel Jews. So there really is no anti-Israel party, there is just "which party is giving Israel more goodies?"

In some ways, neocons are just the latest expression of an old American impulse: "Everyone secretly wants to be an American, we just need to give them the chance." It's foolish, yes, but it's hardly confined to Jewish boomers or even neocons, and it's the source of much of our desire for foreign excursions, for staying in Iraq after we had deposed Hussein. Americans are offended by the idea that the rest of the world doesn't want to follow in its footsteps. All but the most extreme conservatives in America laud America for being a light of progress - that that progress is almost entirely hostile to conservative and traditional values (eg universal franchise, anti-discrimination laws) goes unmentioned.

I am a pro-Israel anti-Zionist. In the mind of the American Jew, Zionism is ethno-nationalism ONLY for the Jews. It can mean nothing else. Ethnostates, states comprised mostly or entirely of one ethnicity, typically the historic resident of the given land, has proven itself to be a solid foundation for peace and order. Yet American Jews, neocon or not, as well as liberals generally, blanch at the prospect of an ethnostate. To be a zionist in America is to say that only the Jews can have an ethnostate, and no one else.

A zionist in Israel is different - from what I've seen among Israelis, at least the right wing zionist types, they aren't reflexively hostile to ethnonationalism, because they haven't grown up with the multiculturalism and anti-Christian sentiment that American Jewry has. Israeli zionists might be skeptical of some ethnostates, but as long as they don't make outright antisemitic statements or aggressive overtures to Israel, they won't really care. Meanwhile, Americans express shock and outrage any time someone somewhere speaks unfavorably of say, homosexuality or "diversity." Israel on the other hand is busy getting chummy with the enemies of its enemies, eg India which just put a Hindu nationalist in power.

Post: #22

You make strong points. Although Leo Strauss was extremely pro-liberty, it is revealing that Strauss never wrote on immigration. (I just did my research because of this thread.) Indeed Strauss might have been the perfect vehicle for Jewry to infect the political right in America, since his rhetoric sounds pro-right yet he is silent on key fundamental issues such as immigration or education. Additionally, Strauss wrote during the time when America actually banned immigration, so it is strange he never commented on it.

Thinking about it more, it seems that the Neoconservatives and other Jews on the right are part of the Jewry who see Islam as the biggest threat, while Progressives and Jews on the left are part of the Jewry who see Christianity as the biggest threat. In both cases, however, Israel is the top priority it is just that both are focused on different enemies.

And the outcome is Jew-positive no matter which party in America gets elected - if Republicans get elected then Muslims get shit on, and if Democrats are elected then Christians get shit on.

Post: #23

American and western jewry used to laud Russia during the Yeltzin years because the oligarchs were all jews. The jewish oligarchs owned almost everything. Then came Putin and took their money and imprisoned some.

Since then, zionist jews have had a real hard on for Putin. The latest Ukraine fiasco is just the continuation of that.

This is a great documentary with interviews with most of the oligarchs. Very interesting:

Post: #24

"American and western jewry used to laud Russia during the Yeltzin years because the oligarchs were all jews. The jewish oligarchs owned almost everything. Then came Putin and took their money and imprisoned some."

I wonder what the relations between the Russian Jews and the government is like. I have heard it is good, and that the chief Lubavitch rabbi Berel Lazar is close to Putin. What matters is that they are Russian, and not Western.

"Thinking about it more, it seems that the Neoconservatives and other Jews on the right are part of the Jewry who see Islam as the biggest threat,"

Even then, along with the rest of the right, they refuse to take any substantive policy opposition to Islam. The most they do is pay Geert Wilders to speak a little.

Post: #25

I do know that Leo Strauss was a strong advocate of the Great Books education, however. I read his essay on that and it's amazing. Many right-wing Jews are extremely intelligent and valuable, but you have to separate their Jewish biases from the rest of their work to get value from it.