Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Winner Takes All

Winner Takes All
December 05, 2007, 01:12:54 PM
Since the dawn of Socialism and its ultra-centralized variant, Communism, people have inventively generated a stream of objections: it won't work because it removes competition, it deprives us of individual souls, it's atheistic, it oppresses us and takes away our freedom. All of these are completely wrong once one realizes that Communism and Socialism do not necessarily indicate Stalinism, which is less a political system than the megalomania of rulers in a country where the 94-IQ underclass overbred, blamed its 140-IQ rulers, and after killing them plunged itself into an orgy of cannibalization.

Eastern Europe is not unique in the history of Western cultures except that it persists by sheer numbers, in part because of the withdrawl of Western European powers after the disasters of colonial times. According to Coon's Races of Europe, Slavs were originally a hybrid of corded Nordic, Dinaric and Southern European sources, but at the same time Mongols surged across the plains of Russia, somehow became the modern shorter, simpler, cruder variant. Dare we posit a bit of interbreeding with the conquerors? Indeed, the Slavic nations fell the hardest before the Mongols, and Western Europe never forgave them, because the reason for their downfall was individual selfishness to the degree that they could not even unite against a common oppressor.

Winner Takes All
”The Revolution ends by devouring its own children” – Jacques Mallet du Pan, 1793

Re: Winner Takes All
December 06, 2007, 04:53:42 PM
Great article for anyone beginning to grow interest in ANUS.

What I liked here is the idea of the best method taking over and prevailing over the different routes offered to solve a problem. When you think about it it's quite common-sense yet somehow gov's always fall into extremes: that of either capitalism or socialism which both fail as seen before. It's really a wonder why no one applies the more balanced idea given here. Well, it isn't much of wonder when you take popularity into the equation...

One question though is about the Slavic nations falling prey to the mongols, which I don't quite understand. To the best of my knowledge if it weren't for the those slavic nations who stopped the invasion, everybody in Europe would fucking speak and look like the Chinese.

Re: Winner Takes All
December 06, 2007, 05:33:02 PM
The Western penetration of the Mongols was stopped largely by a combination of the mailed chivalry of the Holy Roman Empire in the north (this is why the Teutonic order came into being initially, though it later was used to bring fire and sword to the Slavic and Baltic pagans) and by the vast armies of the Islamic Mameluks of Egypt in the south.

As always, the steppe nomads were a terror when facing disorganized peoples incapable of mounting united resistance (Russia) or overextended empires whose military might was too dispersed to bring to bear effectively (China), but overmatched when faced with sophisticated, organized states capable of bringing even greater numbers than the Mongol hordes to bear (the Mameluks) or more disciplined, more heavily armed and armored Western forces who brought them to battle on terrain that negated  the mobility of the Mongol ponies and forced them to fight at close quarters (the Germans).

Re: Winner Takes All
December 06, 2007, 07:02:21 PM
Yes. The efforts of the Teutonic peoples cannot be overlooked in this regard. And of course, they have the natural defense of infinite pine forrests on their side, which many hundreds of years earlier had also made it very difficult for Rome to conduct successful campaigns in the area.

However, you way also wish to examine the annihilation of the Tatar strongholds by Ivan the Terrible.