For over a thousand years, the West has feared the Yellow Peril.
Consistently, throughout recorded history, China has contained one fifth of the entire human race. And everybody realized
that if a white country was united and contained a fifth of hte human race, it would take over the planet.
China was united for centuries at a time. Surely the Yellow Peril would take over the world.
There were breaks in this certainty that the Chinese would take over the world.
During those breaks, there were other people who were certain to take over the world. In aingle century Islam went from a
single Prophet to fielding an army all the way up into Tours in today’s Belgium.
According to historians, only a historical accident kept Islam from crushing hte West as it had crushed all others.
Again and again, at the height of its power, Islam slammed into Vienna, and fell back. And every time Islam moved up towards
Vienna, it was agredd in the West that a white country that united that many people could not be stopped.
The red-haired, green-eyed Ghenghis Khan rolled over China in an unstoppable wave. They reached Vienna.
Then a historical accident, the death of Ghenghis Khan or something else, kept them from going any farther.
Then, once again, the Yellow Peril was the Inevitable Future.
Over and over and over and over,t he West has been doomed.
Over and over and over, the West has been divided in the face of a united enemy.
I watched while a united Revolutionary Communism used the top officials of our own government. No country that became
Communist during the Cold War ever went back to the Free World.
It was obviously inevitable.
They got to Vienna. They lost Vienna and a generation later they disappeared.
Why is it that WE are always divided against ourselves but the united Inevitable Conquerors end up as a lost incident of
history?
Is it a string of coincidences, the chances of which are about one in a million?
Or is it because we are unconquerable for the precise reason that we are always divided?
Ghengis Khan, China, Islam, Communism, each has tolled over and united everybody who fell under the general definition
“mankind.” Then they slammed into the West.
We are NOT “mankind.” We are brawling, aggressive people no one can unite.
Or conquer.
#1 by Mark on 09/16/2006 - 3:05 pm
NOT SPAM
NOT SPAM
“We are NOT “mankind.” We are brawling, aggressive people no one can unite. Or Conquer.”
Bob, what about the welfare trolls I see every weekend while shopping for groceries?
They are white, usually obese, dirty, not old, addicted to taxayer’s money to the point
of thinking it’s owed to them, have hords of white-trash kids (from multiple fathers) trailing along
behind the “Free” food cart. These people HAVE been conquered and they are WHITE! If it can happen to them, what makes you think it can’t happen to the rest of the white race?
I fear this, I really do.
#2 by Pain on 09/16/2006 - 6:13 pm
NOT SPAM
NOT SPAM
“Or is it because we are unconquerable for the precise reason that we are always divided? Ghengis Khan, China, Islam, Communism, each has tolled over and united everybody who fell under the general definition “mankind.” Then they slammed into the West. We are NOT “mankind.” We are brawling, aggressive people no one can unite.
Or conquer.”
Wonderful stuff. You can keep writing this kind over and over again.
It has something to do with an inner necessity of responsibility, of needing to get it right, of knowing that the consequences of submission are worse in terms of the suffering physical and spiritual than the suffering necessary to fight it out. If you know hell is ahead of you whether you fight or not, you might as well fight it out. And being smarter and tougher, eventually we win. The going is rough but the other choice is both rough and permanent.
Thus is the everlasting fight that is the glory of life.
#3 by Simmons on 09/17/2006 - 7:28 am
NOT SPAM
NOT SPAM
With the Pope’s latest wack at PC we might see the next siege of Vienna in our lifetime.
Even the respectables might come around and denounce liberalism so they can distance themselves
from the obvious outcomes of self hatred that is bound up in liberalism.
#4 by Pain on 09/17/2006 - 3:16 pm
NOT SPAM
NOT SPAM
By the way, when every sentence in an article is its own paragraph, the whole article looks like one endless double-spaced paragraph. It’s hard to read.
#5 by joe rorke on 09/18/2006 - 5:53 pm
They didn’t get past Vienna yet. The Japs had basketballs. They just didn’t have our resources. Had they our resources they might well have beat the snot out of us.
#6 by mderpelding on 09/18/2006 - 9:15 pm
NOT SPAM
FEEL THE IRONY.
If we are as we believe ourselves to be,
We Will be ascendent.
As we were when our people followed our
manifest destiny.
If we as a people have fallen short in
our own estimation,
we need to find out WHY.
We were a “brawling, agressive people”.
Now we are a suicidal self hating people.
I read an interesting newspaper article today
about a man who works in Detroit picking up bodies
at $14.00 per person.
This man noted that in the city of Detroit,
blacks kill each other.
In the suburbs,
whites kill themselves.
Does anybody know why whites would prefer suicide?
We refuse to comprimise.
Maybe not at the same point.
But, eventually,most white people reach a point
at which they would rather die than “give in”.
To my thinking,
we whites are in an all or nothing position.
Either we trust in our destiny to rule the world
with our own kind,
or we fail miserably.
And kill ourselves.
Because we failed.
White people cannot accept anything less.
Our nature won’t allow it.