Millennial Woes makes some surprising comments about the Chinese in his critique of libertarianism

Comments I made under his video:

Libertarians are such cowards unable to agree on libertarian principles let alone organise a piss-up in a brewery.

You could have said that an ethno-state is likely to have fewer laws because it could be that most white men would in theory agree about kicking out Jews, Muslims and non-whites and not have to deal with their culture or worry about hurting their feelings with anti-Semitic, Islamophobic, racist, and LGBT-phobic comments white heterosexual men might want to make about these minorities. On the other hand, if white men don't have a religion the overwhelming majority of them are agreed on, they could be burning heretics, fighting the European Wars of Religion, and the English Civil War all over again.

Are the Chinese known for having a tendency to vote for bigger government? This is the first I have heard about it.

The danger of limited government is that it would have too few laws and public services eg schools, hospitals, armed forces, police, law courts etc and the danger of tyrannical government is that it could lead to rebellion. Government should therefore aspire to having only the necessary laws required to bring about human flourishing and the free speech required to have these philosophical discussions. Obviously, all viable and stable nations would have a dominant culture that does not tolerate degenerate practices and policies that undermine the national interest. Once Western Man kicks out the real cause of his malaise - his thraldom to feminism and its systematic destruction of the institutions of marriage and the family - he will stop feeling quite so angry and upset about being a second class citizen in his own land, once he gets his women to behave decently under a New Settlement and new system of government. I have a few ideas that nationalists may find helpful.

"The Chinese will want our innovations and our money?" They already know the British are skint and are buying up the British family silver the British are so happy to sell to them. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/aug/10/chinese-investors-pump-money-into-the-uk-but-what-big-brands-do-they-own

"The Chinese have been very very statist for a very long time." Please cite your authority for this proposition. I really have never heard of this being said about them. I have heard of them being called the Yellow Peril but that it is their "cultural inheritance" to be the most "statist"? Well, knock me down with a feather! Do you know any Chinese people at all?

Non-whites vote for the left for the same reasons women vote for the left: because Labour bribes them with them with state handouts and tell them scare stories about Tories whom they say will send them on the first banana boat home. When minorities feel secure enough about their status in their new country and have acquired some success, they will vote for lower taxes and limited government too and even UKIP and BNP when they too are fed up with immigration.

You really shouldn't get so sensitive and over-defensive about people trying to catch you out with "gotcha" questions. It is all part of the rough and tumble of politics. I wait for interesting, intelligent and difficult questions on https://ask.fm/oneparty4all and hardly ever get them. Have you any questions you can't answer, Woes? Happy to help!

The Jews and the Chinese

They have a few things in common. The Chinese are called the Jews of Asia and in Indonesia there have been anti-Chinese pogroms just as the Jews have suffered pogroms in Europe.

One of the most interesting aspect of anti-Chinese feeling in the Far East is the different legal status of the Chinese in Indonesia and Malaysia respectively.

Anti-Chinese pogroms are more frequent in Indonesia though they have been known to happen in Malaysia too, but officially the Chinese and the indigenous Muslim Indonesian have parity of status. We must remember that Indonesia is also an empire and this necessarily means having a dominant culture, the quelling rebellions from time to time and basically kicking minorities around for the purpose of imposing and retaining imperial hegemony.

In Malaysia, the bumiputra - the indigenous Malay Muslim, translated as the Prince of the Land - has privileges that the other races are not entitled to in terms of university places, employment quotas etc.

On this matter my family are divided. My father says this is obviously unfair. My mother however says it is imperative that the Malays keep their privileges because if they don't, they won't be able to compete with the other races and will for this reason get angry and then have their anti-Chinese pogroms.

Does this mean the Malays have racial superiority? I would suggest not.

I know the BNP would love indigenous whites to have racial privileges over non-whites, but does this mean they are racially superior? I would suggest not.

But then this is not a question of who is racially superior but what is fair, practicable and conducive to national harmony.

What is a racist?

It seems this means anyone who proposes any policy that discriminates on grounds of race, but it is certainly arguable that in certain circumstances it can be fair to do so, and even conducive to national harmony.

If I were to say that the Jews are a superior race, does that mean I am racist? I am not a Jewess, but I like to think I am in thinking like one. I have said before that Judaism is like an exclusive golf club while Islam is more akin to a political party in a single party state. It is certainly possible to be both a member of an exclusive club as well as a member of a political party in a single party state and I like to think I am capable of both.

Why are the Chinese considered the Jews of Asia? Probably because we are thought to be good with money and too clever by half, with an impenetrable language operating by the rules of patriarchy with many rituals and traditions.

Why might I say the Jews are a superior race to the Chinese?

Because the strength of the Jewish tribe comes from adherence to their traditions, which may in time triumph over the numbers of the Chinese, especially if they lose their traditions, which I feel bound to say they have.

The Jews have also been around even longer than the Chinese who are also well known to have been around for quite a while, hence all those Jewish jokes about what the Jews did before there was any Chinese food.

https://forums.egullet.org/topic/113757-why-jews-like-chinese-food/

http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-life-and-religion/53569/jewish-christmas 

Saatchi Gallery on 3 January 2013

GAIETY IS THE MOST OUTSTANDING
FEATURE OF THE SOVIET UNION

21 NOV 2012 - 5 MAY 2013

HONG KONG EYE 2012

5 December 2012 - 12 January 2013

Jeffrey Marshall inside wooden tank which special footage of exhibits and sound effects.  You can pretend you are going round the gallery blasting exhibits you dislike.  

BREAKING THE ICE: MOSCOW ART, 1960-80s

21 Nov 2012 - 24 Feb 2013

Can I have dinner with the Chinese Ambassador now please?

I didn't marry into royalty to schlep around in a taxi': Kate is branded a gold-digger in bizarre promotional video for Chinese city

Bizarre advertisement sees royal lookalikes trying to hail a taxi
It shows the 'Duchess' moaning because she can't use the royal limo
Video appears to mock Kate for failing to carve out her own career

is how The Hatemail has chosen to portray this publicity video advertising the promptness of the black cabs of Chengdu.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2167299/Kate-Middleton-mocked-gold-digger-Chinese-tourism-video.html

I bet the script was thought up by someone BRITISH paid for by the Chengdu Association for Cultural Exchange.

So, again it is the British themselves who have been rude about their monarchy.

The video was conceived, filmed and acted by the British themselves. The Chinese paid for the publicity stunt, and that was the extent of Chinese involvement in this matter. I am sure they did not set out to insult the Royal Family. They probably saw nothing wrong with the video because the British are always insulting members of the royal family and they have seen much worse.

I think it is rather charming that Chengdu now have black cabs.

And trust the Hatemail to make a nice story nasty.

(Can I have dinner with the Chinese Ambassador now, please?)

Anti-Chinese Violence in Algeria, proof that Welfare State to Blame for All Britain's Ills

This clip is quite amusing about why the Algerians might get cross with the Chinese and their pet-eating tendencies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqrqU5lzcqA

Below is a Chinese version of events.

http://chinanewswrap.com/2009/08/05/chinese-workers-and-local-residents-brawl-in-algeria-chinese-shops-destroyed/

Malaysian Chinese citizens described as "squatters" by indigenous Malay politician

Rising Racial Tension in Malaysia

http://asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1426&Itemid=31

Adverse possession - a legal concept that can turn a squatter into an owner - should be borne in mind by the maker of that statement that the Malaysian Chinese citizen is but a mere squatter in Malaysia.

It is unfortunate that such petulant statements have been made, but resentment of the more economically canny Chinese by the laid-back Malay has echoes in Britain today, where the white indigenous working classes feel they have the bread taken out of their mouths by foreign workers prepared to work harder for less.

The truth is that Malaysia is now swamped by other immigrants - from Indonesia and Bangladesh - and most Malaysian employers declare their preference for foreign labour, because the locals are lazy, do sickies, are full of excuses and don't know the meaning of hard work ...

In truth even the Malays are not as indigenous as the genuine aborigines of Malaysia, ie the Dayaks, Kadazans, Negritos, and have in their turn exploited and sidelined the previous occupiers.

A comment has been made by a Malay that the Chinese are the Jews of Asia and just as unpopular.

The truth is no one likes the class swot. The desire and temptation to tear up his books and smash his glasses is never far away.

Let us hope that Anwar, smeared as a sodomite by the ruling party, who has nevertheless managed the feat of keeping together a coalition of

(a) liberal Malays keen to give up their race privileges because they find their protected status unedifying and unnecessary,

(b) an Islamic Party that says it does not really want an Islamic state and

(c) non-Muslim non-Malays of liberal-socialistic bent,

will keep the racial lid from boiling over, perhaps by gently pointing out to the offended Chinese the existence of squatters' rights.

Balancing Safety and Recklessness on 1 May 2008

Ken or the BNP candidate Richard Barnbrook? Or both? (There is the option of a second vote.)

How should Londoners vote? According to whom they think will probably win, like a punter betting on a horse? (In this case, it has to be for "our" Ken, a smooth operator with his super-sensitive political antennae. He did not want to invade Iraq, unlike Bungling Boris, who voted for the invasion. Ken was right about the IRA, surfing on the crest of Political Correctness and anti-car Environmentalism as he does. Ken at least knows to suck up to the Chinese and Muslims whose powers are waxing, whether we like it or not, and to abandon Uncle Sam whose powers are waning. The US will no doubt be wanting to have a bit of quiet to deal with the effects of the credit crunch and reap the whirlwind that Greenspan has sown. Ken for Foreign Secretary? We could do worse!)

Or, should Londoners vote for what would upset our ruling classes MOST? (In that case, The Protest Party of Londoners can only be the BNP, to cause maximum alarm to our ruling classes!)

What would YOU want to do, as a Londoner? "Win" a "bet", or upset the ruling classes?

The option of voting for the kind of policies you really want, eg lower taxes, lower crime, controlling immigration etc does NOT exist in our political system, as you must already know. We are now just reduced to choosing someone we think we could like and trust, when they are mostly fools, knaves and no-hopers. Well, maybe we should now start thinking about what we would like to DO, for a change, and the sort of message we want to send our ruling classes.

Now that our democratic “choice” has been reduced to these two stark choices, could it now be time to question the political system under which we are governed?

Vote: Should Londoners vote BNP on 1 May 2008 to upset and alarm our ruling classes?
http://www.1party4all.co.uk/Home/Account/TopicForm.aspx?topicsId=105

What are the Tibetans for?

I am still unclear about the Tibetan contribution towards world civilisation. So: they pray, whinge about oppression by the Chinese (though previously they must have been complaining about their previous colonial masters - the British), make a tourist industry out of their religion and rituals and last but not least, take the toddler son off any Tibetan if they think he is Dalai Lama material.

Nice, that. The cleverer and more promising your son is, the more likely he is to be taken into "care" when the priests come round, disguised, for their, er, milk round. (The present Dalai Lama was "recruited" when he was two.) Bear in mind that if that were to happen, you won't be having any grandchildren if he is your only son. Dalai Lamas are like Catholic priests - condemned to a life of celibacy, and possibly paedophilia or at the very least homosexuality, when normal sexuality is forbidden expression .... Are the Tibetans now to be regarded as some sort of protected species, like Aborigines in Australia, the Red Indians, Eskimoes and the Pitcairn people?

Why don't we leave them alone and let them fade away, if their culture no longer equips them to deal with modern life? It might really be kindest thing to do.


http://www.chinese-embassy.org.uk/eng/sghd/t416831.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibet

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7279789.stm

http://www.freetibet.org/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalai_Lama