Leaving NATO

I don’t usually post rumors, but as we know, /pol/ is always right.

ALERT: Unconfirmed reports that President Trump will announce that the US is leaving NATO in his joint address to US Congress tomorrow.

This would be absolutely fantastic news. I hope he’ll announce the planned withdrawal of all US troops and nuclear missiles as well.

We’ll find out tonight. He’s already the greatest US President of my lifetime. And it looks like he’s going to give Andrew Jackson a very serious run for his money over the rest of his 3,500-year term.

DISCUSS ON SG


Clown World Abandons Taiwan

“The Taiwan Fixation” is a long and meandering article in Foreign Affairs that serves to obscure the primary point being made there. But the inescapable conclusion eventually reached by the intrepid reader who manages to slash-and-burn his way through the jungle-like maze of text is that Clown World’s strategerists now accept that the US military is no longer capable of winning a war with China. Which is good, because it isn’t.

The fate of Taiwan keeps American policymakers up at night, and it should. A Chinese invasion of the island would confront the United States with one of its gravest foreign policy choices ever. Letting Taiwan fall to Beijing would dent Washington’s credibility and create new challenges for U.S. military forces in Asia. But the benefits of keeping Taiwan free would have to be weighed against the costs of waging the first armed conflict between great powers since 1945. Even if the United States prevailed—and it might well lose—an outright war with China would likely kill more Americans and destroy more wealth than any conflict since the Vietnam War and perhaps since World War II. Nuclear and cyber weapons could make it worse, bringing destruction on the U.S. homeland. These would be catastrophic consequences for the United States.

As terrible as a U.S.-Chinese war would be, an American president would face immense pressure to fight for Taipei. Many U.S. policymakers are convinced that Taiwan, a prosperous democracy in a vital region, is worth protecting despite the daunting price of doing so. Political calculations may also push a U.S. president into war. By staying out, the president could expect to be blamed not only for permitting the economic meltdown that China’s invasion would trigger but also for losing Taiwan after a decades-long battle of wills between Washington and Beijing over the island’s future. That would doom a president’s legacy. Against such a certainty, any chance of salvaging the situation could look like a better bet—and by opting to fight China to protect Taiwan, the president would preserve the possibility of going down in history as a great wartime victor. In the 1960s, President Lyndon Johnson faced a choice between ramping up a U.S. military campaign in Vietnam and allowing the Communists to take over the country. He doubted that a war was necessary or winnable. But he sent American soldiers all the same.

U.S. leaders need a way to escape the ghastly decision to either wage World War III or watch Taiwan go down. They need a third option. Washington must make a plan that enables Taiwan to mount a viable self-defense, allows the United States to assist from a distance, and keeps the U.S. position in Asia intact regardless of how a cross-strait conflict concludes. This way, the United States could abstain from sending its military forces to defend Taiwan if China invades the island and does not attack U.S. bases or warships..

Before the moment of crisis arrives, political leaders should initiate a frank national dialogue about U.S. interests in the western Pacific. Americans must know the true costs of conflict with China: the deaths of tens and perhaps hundreds of thousands of U.S. soldiers, the possibility that nuclear weapons would be fired in desperation, an economic downturn dwarfing that of the Great Recession of 2008, and severe disruption to everyday life. It will take great effort for policymakers to communicate the scale of the potential devastation because a war with China would look nothing like the relatively small and contained wars that the United States has waged in recent decades.

In addition to making clear the costs of war with China, U.S. officials should stress the need to coexist with China as prominently as they discuss the need to compete with it. In the coming years, especially if Beijing’s behavior improves, American policymakers should adopt “competitive coexistence” as an approach for U.S. relations with China. In doing so, they would convey Washington’s willingness to establish stable patterns of interaction, limit security competition, and address global problems collaboratively. At a minimum, political leaders should avoid undue alarmism about Taiwan. The Biden administration was right to tamp down public speculation about the year by which China might intend to launch an invasion. The Trump administration should go further to discourage catastrophic thinking, including by communicating to the public that China would not pose an immeasurably greater challenge to the United States if Taiwan came under its control.

I don’t know why the neocons are preemptively aligning themselves with reality in the case of China when they aggressively refused to do so in the case of Russia. Perhaps they simply don’t hate the Chinese with the same irrational hatred they harbor for the Russians, perhaps the extent of the Chinese industrial advantage is simply too great for even the most magickal-thinkers to believe they can simply wish away, or, more likely, they want to reserve the limited US military resources that will be available for any foreign adventures for the Middle East.

The trade war with China should provide sufficient excitement to keep even the most inveterate drama-seekers occupied. There is simply no benefit to the United States of engaging in an actual war in the South Pacific.

DISCUSS ON SG


20 Percent Tariffs on China

The God-Emperor 2.0 knows perfectly well that trade wars are winnable, in some circumstances, and that those circumstances apply to the USA vis-a-vis China as well as a number of other Asian and European countries, as indicated by his most recent Executive Order:

Section 1. Background. With Executive Order 14195 of February 1, 2025 (Imposing Duties to Address the Synthetic Opioid Supply Chain in the People’s Republic of China), I determined that the failure of the Government of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to act to blunt the sustained influx of synthetic opioids, including fentanyl, flowing from the PRC to the United States constituted an unusual and extraordinary threat, which has its source in substantial part outside the United States, to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States. To address that threat, I invoked my authority under section 1702(a)(1)(B) of IEEPA to impose ad valorem tariffs on articles that are products of the PRC, as defined by the Federal Register notice described in section 2(d) of Executive Order 14195, as amended by Executive Order 14200 of February 5, 2025 (Amendment to Duties Addressing the Synthetic Opioid Supply Chain in the People’s Republic of China).

Pursuant to section 3 of Executive Order 14195, I have determined that the PRC has not taken adequate steps to alleviate the illicit drug crisis through cooperative enforcement actions, and that the crisis described in Executive Order 14195 has not abated.

Sec. 2. Amendment. In recognition of the fact that the PRC has not taken adequate steps to alleviate the illicit drug crisis, section 2(a) of Executive Order 14195 is hereby amended by striking the words “10 percent” and inserting in lieu thereof the words “20 percent”.

Although China’s Foreign Ministry is clinging to its Ricardian rhetoric, the fact that they’re not escalating tends to indicate that they understand that at least with regards to this particular trade issue, the US President holds all the cards.

The New York Times: The United States has imposed further 10 percent tariffs on most goods from China. What is your reaction?

Lin Jian: I believe you’ve noticed the statements released by competent Chinese departments. The fentanyl issue is a flimsy excuse to raise U.S. tariffs on Chinese imports. China has made clear its opposition more than once. Our countermeasures to defend our rights and interests are fully legitimate and necessary.

The U.S., not anyone else, is responsible for the fentanyl crisis inside the U.S. In the spirit of humanity and goodwill towards the American people, we have taken robust steps to assist the U.S. in dealing with the issue. This is obvious to all and people from various sectors in the U.S. have expressed thanks to China on multiple occasions. Instead of recognizing our efforts, the U.S. has sought to smear and shifted the blame to China, and is seeking to pressure and blackmail China with tariff hikes. They’ve been punishing us for helping them. This is not going to solve the U.S.’s problem and will undermine our counternarcotics dialogue and cooperation. 

Let me reiterate that intimidation does not scare us. Bullying does not work on us. Pressuring, coercion or threats are not the right way of dealing with China. Anyone using maximum pressure on China is picking the wrong guy and miscalculating. If the U.S. truly wants to solve the fentanyl issue, then the right thing to do is to consult with China on the basis of equality, mutual respect and mutual benefit to address each other’s concerns. If the U.S. has other agenda in mind and if war is what the U.S. wants, be it a tariff war, a trade war or any other type of war, we’re ready to fight till the end. We urge the U.S. to stop being domineering and return to the right track of dialogue and cooperation at an early date. 

Below is the list of the ten countries whose positions are weakest concerning a potential trade war with the USA:

  • China $279 billion
  • Mexico $152 billion
  • Vietnam $104 billion
  • Germany $83 billion
  • Japan $71 billion
  • Canada $67 billion
  • Ireland $65 billion
  • South Korea $51 billion
  • Taiwan $47 billion
  • Italy $44 billion

DISCUSS ON SG


Clown World’s Bluff

The European retarderati doesn’t know how to fight, do diplomacy, or do anything else except double down on its delusional rhetoric. An Austrian Clown World puppet by the name of Gunther Fehlinger-Jahn, the Chairman of the Austria NATO NGO, actually dared to threaten Americans and the God-Emperor 2.0 himself:

If MAGA/Putin America wants to play hard ball with us in Europe, we shall do the following.

  • 50% tariffs on all US imports
  • Confiscating all USA military assets in Europe if case US withdraws USA military staff
  • No more inteligence sharing
  • No more visits or invitations
  • Boycott key American products whose owners support Trump as Tesla, SpaceX
  • Exclude USA defence sector from EU military procurement
  • Cancel all F35 contracts etc
  • We produce our own defence material ourself of buy it from Ukraine, Turkey or South Korea

Call them on it, Mr. President. By all means, call them on it! It’s hard to think of anything that would shatter the European Union faster, more completely, and permanently than seeing it attempt to flex on a tripartite economic alliance of China, Russia, and the USA. Europe is a continent, it is not a regional power or even an actual power at all.

These little European yap dogs behave like men who were never spanked as children or punched in the mouth as adults. They have no ability to distinguish between verbal posturing and material power.

UPDATE: The God-Emperor called at least part of the Eurocrat bluff.

President Donald Trump is putting a pause on all military aid to Ukraine and issuing an ultimatum to President Volodymyr Zelensky after their Oval Office meeting blew up on Friday. All military equipment not currently in Ukraine will be halted and all future aid is now in jeopardy.

DISCUSS ON SG


Leave NATO, Leave the UN

Not only is there absolutely no benefit to Americans to the USA being a member of NATO and the UN, but both globalist institutions represent a financial drain as well as a clear and present existential danger to the United States, as the God-Emperor 2.0 has obviously noted.

President Trump has launched his latest attack against Europe after he claimed that the United States should worry more about ‘migrant rape gangs and drug lords’ than Vladimir Putin or ‘end up like Europe’.

The President made the comment on his Truth Social media platform where he wrote: ‘We should spend less time worrying about Putin, and more time worrying about migrant rape gangs, drug lords, murderers, and people from mental institutions entering our Country – So that we don’t end up like Europe!’

Trump’s comment comes as Europe faces a brutal reality check where the continent may not be able to rely on America for its security anymore.

NATO, in particular, is an existential danger to the USA and should be defunded and disavowed at the earliest opportunity. The USA’s so-called “allies” are actively and openly conspiring to throw themselves at the Russian war machine in the full knowledge of their inability to even make a dent in it, then wave Article 5 to demand their rescue with the lives of American soldiers.

President Trump wisely withdrew the military and financial support for the Kiev regime that had emboldened it to take foolish actions it never would have otherwise dared. Now it is time for him to do exactly the same thing for the Clown World puppets currently presiding – mostly undemocratically – over the various European nations.

Ironically, the only way Russia can possibly be a threat to Americans is if the US leaders are dumb enough to agree to the European cowardly demands of “let’s see you and him fight!” It would make far more sense for the God-Emperor to declare war on the European Union than on Russia.

DISCUSS ON SG


The Mysterious Omission

Ron Unz delves into the French Revolution and discovers a very interesting omission from Simon Schama’s popular history of that revolution:

Given its great length, Schama’s account provided an enormous amount of detail on the French society of that era and the course of the revolution that suddenly upended it. But his narrative very conspicuously lacked any direct explanation of why that colossal upheaval occurred, instead suggesting the French Revolution resulted from a combination of unforeseen, contingent factors and events. Two years of bad harvests had driven up the price of bread and the blunders of the king and some of his ministers provoked the spontaneous political combustion that brought down their thousand-year monarchy, while further mistakes gradually moved the revolution in an increasingly radical and bloody direction.

This constituted the major contrast with Webster’s account, which instead presented a very different interpretation of roughly the same historical facts. She portrayed the French Revolution in strictly conspiratorial terms as the deliberately planned outcome of particular political plots.

Some of her theories seemed quite unlikely. Her book was written during the height of the anti-German propaganda of the First World War. Therefore, on the basis of extremely thin evidence, she suggested that prior to his death in 1786, Frederick the Great of Prussia had sought to weaken the French monarchy and its Austrian alliance by promoting Masonic propaganda against Queen Marie Antoinette, the daughter of Austrian Empress Marie Theresa, who for decades had been his foremost geopolitical adversary.

But the main conspiracy that Webster described was hardly an implausible one, with neither the motive nor the means being outlandish, and she drew heavily upon contemporaneous sources for her analysis. The individual whom she fingered as the primary orchestrator of the French Revolution had also been discussed by Schama but only given glancing coverage.

As I had mentioned earlier, Philippe, the enormously wealthy Duc d’Orléans, was the king’s cousin and a close heir to the throne, ranked just behind the youngest brother of Louis XVI. Yet rather remarkably, he became one of the major early patrons of the revolutionary movement, even officially renaming himself “Égalité” as a sign of his support.

Among his large personal holdings was the Palais-Royal estate in Paris. Both Schama and Webster emphasized that he allowed it to be used as a hotbed and staging area for revolutionary activism, its private grounds being off limits to the French police authorities. Schama treated this as merely due to his liberal, open-minded tendencies, but according to Webster it was only one of the many actions he took deliberately aimed at destabilizing the ruling monarchy and then replacing his cousin on its throne. Whether or not her analysis was correct, the important role of the Palais-Royal in the early stages of the revolution appeared on dozens of pages of Schama’s text, and indeed many members of the National Assembly later described it as the “birthplace of the Revolution.”

One of the earliest cases of mass urban violence in Paris was a major riot at a wallpaper factory, leading to more than two dozen deaths, and this important story was covered at length by both Schama and Webster. Philippe visited the scene during that incident and threw small bags of money to the cheering rioters. Their attack on the factory was initially blocked by government troops, but after the latter were forced to open their lines to allow the carriage of Philippe’s wife to pass, the rioters poured through that gap and destroyed both the factory and the home of its influential owner. Both authors reported all these same facts, but only Webster treated them highly suspicious.

According to Webster, this was only one of many such examples. She argued that Philippe deployed his vast wealth to recruit thousands of violent brigands, who launched attacks against government facilities and civilian infrastructure, all aimed at fostering the spread of lawlessness, violent unrest, and the resulting wild rumors that would weaken the hold of the king and provoke an uprising. In fact, at one point Schama freely admitted that “later generations of royalist historians” had claimed that many of these incidents were orchestrated by Philippe and his fellow plotters in order to undermine government authority and allow him to seize the throne. But the author then made no effort to either explore or refute those accusations.

A couple of months after that first large riot, Philippe played a crucial role in leading the political revolt of most of the traditional French parliament against monarchical authority, and these members soon formed the new National Assembly in its place.

Later that same year, a mob of Parisian protesters led by women marched on Versailles and violently stormed the residence of the king and queen, who narrowly escaped with their lives. Philippe was later accused of having planned their murder by funding those rioters, who allegedly chanted his name as their new king. Once again, Webster heavily emphasized these facts, while Schama minimized them.

Webster also noted that the colors adopted early on by the revolutionary forces—white, blue, and red—happened to exactly match the colors of Philippe’s Orléans family. Perhaps this was mere coincidence, but perhaps not.

Given her future areas of historical interest, Webster also naturally emphasized that Philippe served as the Grand Master of French Freemasonry, presumably giving him a great web of hidden influence over the elite elements of his society, something obviously very helpful in overthrowing a regime. Schama entirely omitted that potentially important fact, and instead explicitly dismissed all such conspiratorial notions in just a few sentences:

To counter-revolutionary writers, looking back on the disaster of 1789, the proliferation of seditious and libelous material seemed even more sinister, evidence of a conspiracy hatched between godless followers of Voltaire and Rousseau, Freemasons, and the Duc d’Orléans. Was not the Palais-Royal after all one of the most notorious dens of iniquity, where even the police were forbidden from pouncing on peddlers of literary trash? Understandably, modern historians have steered clear of anything that could be construed as subscribing to the literary conspiracy theory of the French Revolution.

Wikipedia is notorious for representing the establishmentarian perspective on historical events and shying away from any questionable conspiratorial claims. But although the page on Phillipe makes no mention of Webster, the factual account it provided seemed closer to her analysis than that of Schama.

We should also not entirely ignore an interesting historical echo that came decades later. After the final defeat of Napoleon, the Bourbon monarchy was restored in France, and two of Louis XVI’s younger brothers then successively held the throne. But in the Second French Revolution of 1830, Charles X was overthrown and replaced by his cousin Louis Philippe d’Orléans, Philippe’s surviving son, who thus finally achieved the goal that his late father had allegedly sought.

Judging Webster’s work and weighing her conclusions against those of Schama is obviously difficult for a non-specialist such as myself, but I can certainly understand why her book was so highly regarded by at least some scholars when it appeared in 1919. Her main historical analysis seemed solidly based upon reliable sources of that era, many of which were only available in French, and she made an effort to weigh these against each other and evaluate their credibility. Her text included well over 1,000 footnotes to such crucial source material, while Schama’s provided none at all, instead merely listing the main works he drew upon for each individual chapter. So to some extent, Webster’s book represented new academic research, while Schama had produced what amounted to a very hefty synthesis and presentation of preexisting material.

All of this raises the interesting question of why Schama’s massive volume so casually dismissed and ignored the conspiratorial analysis that had been advanced by Webster more than three generations earlier.

The answer, of course, is that in order to get published and become the primary English language reference on the French Revolution, it was vital for Schama to conceal the involvement of The Empire That Never Ended.

I’ve read Schama’s work twice. I’ve never read anything by Webster. But I have absolutely no doubt that Webster’s work is more historically accurate and reliable, simply because Schama had to omit what has been, over the course of recorded human history, one of the most important actors and drivers of events, which is the intersection of supernatural and material evil that Philip K. Dick identified as The Empire That Never Ended, that AC calls Cabal, that Vladimir Putin calls The Empire of Lies, and which we label Clown World.

The Romans called it Carthage, demanded its defeat, and sowed its grounds with salt. The Conquistadors called it the Aztec Empire and did their best to eradicate it forever. The Crusaders were corrupted by it. The Inquisitors did their best to root it out of Christendom and have been slandered for their efforts ever since. But regardless of what it is called, it will never die because it is not of human origins and the fallen rulers of this world will always find corrupt human spirits who are willing to serve them in return for the false immortality they are offered.

It’s not hard to understand why the wicked are so slavishly committed to the will of their evil masters. They fear death, as they well should, and they will do literally anything in their futile attempts to avoid their inevitable Divine judgment.

DISCUSS ON SG



White Bull at Mobile World

If you’re a young entrepreneur, or someone attempting to break out of a career rut, you absolutely must watch the series of videos White Bull is putting up on their substack, beginning with today’s.

E: When there’s a networking event, what’s the first thing you need to do?

F: Survey the landscape, make some determinations (about who is there and who you should try to talk to), but mainly, just go… You’ve just got to execute, make a decision and go.

E: What’s your advice for young entrepreneurs. They’re just scared!

F: Yeah, it’s always uncharted territory. Uncharted waters. So you can be afraid of your own shadow, getting up in the morning, all of that. But that doesn’t pay the bills, it doesn’t get customers. So engage, say hello, see what’s going on. Ask people questions. They love to talk about themselves. And then, when it’s appropriate, insert what you’re doing.

The key phrase: when it’s appropriate. You can always tell the newbies and the nobodies, because they’re desperate to talk. They don’t listen. They don’t pay any attention to who is who and what is what. The vets, who are actually there to do business, are always relaxed. They’ve probably already got a lunch meeting or a workout session scheduled with the people they’re there to meet, so they’re networking strategically, making connections that may or may not be important in the future.

My advice: listen, don’t talk. Sooner or later, someone will ask you. And when you answer, keep it very short and succinct. You’re not there to sell, you’re there to learn, to connect, and to plant seeds.

DISCUSS ON SG


The Crimean War 2.0

Britain has signed a hundred year agreement to support Ukraine militarily and financially. This includes providing Ukraine £3 billion a year until 2031 and to support Ukraine “for as long as needed,” and establishing military bases along the Sea of Azov, which Russia controls.

I can only assume the plan here is to take on the Russians, then shriek for help in the hope that the Americans are dumb enough to white knight for the British when they wouldn’t do so any longer for the Ukrainians.

Whatever. It’s a truly futile strategy, as a moment’s thought should make clear. If Americans cared about the British enough to fight for them, we would have already sent the SEALs and other special forces into Rotherham and other English cities to take out the Asian rape gangs.

The Polish Prime Minister may be a Clown World puppet, but his summary of the situation is an apt one.

500 million Europeans are asking 300 million Americans to defend them against 140 million Russians.

And about 100 million of those “Americans” are invaders anyhow. The sooner the USA shuts down NATO and brings all of its troops home, the better.

DISCUSS ON SG


Yes, English IS Our Official Language

The God-Emperor 2.0 finally establishes de jure what has always been the de facto case. But it’s official US law now, and all the press-2-for-Spanish apologists are free to voluntarily remigrate themselves and their objections.

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1. Purpose and Policy. From the founding of our Republic, English has been used as our national language. Our Nation’s historic governing documents, including the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, have all been written in English. It is therefore long past time that English is declared as the official language of the United States. A nationally designated language is at the core of a unified and cohesive society, and the United States is strengthened by a citizenry that can freely exchange ideas in one shared language.

In welcoming new Americans, a policy of encouraging the learning and adoption of our national language will make the United States a shared home and empower new citizens to achieve the American dream. Speaking English not only opens doors economically, but it helps newcomers engage in their communities, participate in national traditions, and give back to our society. This order recognizes and celebrates the long tradition of multilingual American citizens who have learned English and passed it to their children for generations to come.

To promote unity, cultivate a shared American culture for all citizens, ensure consistency in government operations, and create a pathway to civic engagement, it is in America’s best interest for the Federal Government to designate one — and only one — official language. Establishing English as the official language will not only streamline communication but also reinforce shared national values, and create a more cohesive and efficient society.

Accordingly, this order designates English as the official language of the United States.

And the winning continues. Still not tired.

DISCUSS ON SG