On September 9, Moscow is electing its Mayor. The undoubted winner will be Sergey Sobyanin, who is poised to achieve about 70% of the vote.
The main “challenger” is KDPR candidate Vadim Kumin, who is slated to do at least twice better than LDPR candidate Mikhail Degtyarev. There are two factors favoring him. First, there is no “liberal candidate” (or “no oppositionist candidate”, in democratist discourse); under such conditions, oppositionist minded voters tend to vote for the commies, not nationalists (the only nationalists who are allowed to participate in mass politics must be strongly pro-Putin). Second, the pensions issue has swiped 15% points off “Kremlin” candidates across the board, at least for the time being; naturally, most of the surplus accrues to commies, who have made it their signature issue.
Welcome to City 17… it’s safer here.
Even so, the commies don’t pose more than a symbolic challenge to Sobyanin. He has been a highly efficient technocrat, and far less nepotistic than his predecessor Luzhkov. He has driven through the gentrification of Moscow, such that large parts of the megapolis are now a SWPL paradise, and comparable to some of the best European cities (but with more 24/7 establishments and less vibrant diversity). He is genuinely popular, and so far as I can see this is well-deserved.
Even Gastarbeiters support LDPR. Sieg Heil!
My usual MO is to vote for the LDPR candidate on the basis that Russian elections may be considered as regime referendums. At the very least, a culture that is more nationalist will be a culture in which I increase my chances of being able to lawfully own a Glock and decrease my chances of getting sent to jail under Article 282 because some “linguistic expert” and graduate of Scientific Communism studies decides I’m an extremist.
However, in this case, I am sufficiently impressed with Sobyanin, and sufficiently unimpressed with LDPR candidate Degtyarev, to vote for the Kremlin candidate.
On September 2, I went to an LDPR rally in front of the US Embassy in support of #FreeButina, though it also doubled as election campaigning for Mikhail Degtyarev, the LDPR candidate for the Mayoralty.
I wasn’t personally impressed with Degtyarev, who talked about geopolitics as opposed to what he’d do as Mayor. Not that it’s necessarily a problem, since I’m personally always done for a fiery rant against American imperialism.
But it’s quite lame when he couches it in SJW speak (e.g. American policemen are shooting Negroes!).
He should leave the ranting to Papa Zhirik, and in all fairness to Degtyarev, at least his speech was mercifully short.
Zhirinovsky in the flesh! Strong performance. He condemns the Communists as anti-Russian nutjobs who killed millions of people, voiced support for the pensions reform (brave political move), and warns of American attempts to divide Russia and China. It was good to see there was none of the kneejerk Sinophobia that’s quite prevalent within their silovik constituency. I have been claiming China would be the next superpower literally since I began blogging a decade ago, and that gratuitous Sinophobia would be ruinous for Russia; bearing in mind the current trajectory of West-Russia relations, it’s safe to say that I have been vindicated.
PS. You can browse through my coverage of the Moscow Elections 2013 here: http://akarlin.com/tag/moscow/
How do you reconcile your vision of China coming superpowerdom with HBD theory? Mongoloids are known to be timid, conformist, risk-averse, uncreative and non-curious people. None of these traits signals dominance. Do you see greatpowerness as a function of population size and IQ scores?
As I pointed out, East Asians tend to economically perform “as they should” minus 5 IQ points. So, like Europe. Indeed, we see that Japan ≈ France. With the bonus that it’s not getting its population replaced, but leave that aside for now. China that converges to current S. Koreans economic level as % of the US will be 3x larger than US.
Military power is a direct function of economic power. China that spends 2% of its GDP to US 4% of GDP on the military will eventually be a full peer to it; if it raises it to 4%, it will dominate the US.
One would think this is all pretty simple.
However, also by analogy with more developed East Asian countries, China will not dominate in elite scientific output for the foreseeable future (it will merely be comparable with the US), and certainly not in cultural output.
Perhaps, a little too simple? South Korea has an economy comparable to Russia’s and spends a similar amount on its military. Are you gonna argue that SK as a nation is as powerful as Russia? I hope you understand how ridiculous it sounds.
Personally, when I think of China 30 years from now I see South Korea. A very big South Korea, but South Korea nonetheless. Forgive my casual racism, but I’m not sure if Chinese brain has the ability to fully grasp the concept of a superpower, let alone act like one.
I’m sure China will be the world’s next superpower, obviously due to its population size (leaving as open question their individual potential).
But I don’t think you can view East Asian nationalities are the same, or even similar by potential.
Imagine grouping European nationalities, and trying to infer from unsuccessful in modern world nationalities like Ukrainians, Moldovans, Polish, Romanians, modern Greeks, – to conclusions about the capabilities of the successful and dominant European nationalities of modern world like English and Germans.
Potential and capabilities of nationalities, are very divergent within the same continent.
Lol, imagine trying to infer about the qualities of German automobiles, from something built in the ZAZ factory.
Japanese modern civilization is very high. It is more developed than France – at least since French civilization started fading over a century ago.
But I doubt can infer from elite success of Japan, much information about future potential of China, as you cannot infer from Denmark, about the future potential of Moldova.
China will surely have more than enough potential to become a superpower, due to its population quantity.
Whether China will become in per capita terms, as successful as Japan, is something impossible to predict.
If it could, and China had potential to reach per capita power and civilization level of Japan, then they are going to be the future of the world. China would be vastly more powerful and culturally dominant than America is today. (The same as putting together 11 Japans, which is how many times Japan’s population fits into China’s).
Superpower, at least in the post-atomic epoch, is much more a result of economic size, technological level, than particular military conquests.
And I think these aspects are even more extenuated recently.
American superpower dominance is expressed in many more subtle ways, than the empire of the 19th century British ruled.
Almost no young people, are now not affected by direct or indirect influence of YouTube, Instagram, Google, Facebook, etc. (All this new American power, emerging in only 20 years from their technological entrepreneurship.)
–
What might be the worst outcome for the Chinese, is that they become technically superpower, due to size of their population – but stay mediocre culturally, in terms of civilization and maybe in per capita economic terms.
In this way, they will be a superpower, but in the way Soviet Union was a superpower.
However, if they can achieve in the future the same per capita levels of economic and cultural output as Japan, then they will become by far the dominant country of the world. A single country with the economic and cultural output of 11 Japans, would inevitably turn America into an economic and cultural dwarf.
I’m not sure there is any reason to believe they will ever be as successful as Japan in per capita terms, unless you believe strongly in the importance of their high scores in IQ tests.
You are using the wrong figures. Nominal GDP is useless (even worse, totally misleading), if there is significant difference in purchasing power between compared countries. If countries A and B both have 10 billion dollar military budgets, but in country B the average wage is 1/4th of country A’s level, the achieved military power will not be close. Assuming that both are industrialized nations.
Other thing is that South Korea imports substantial amount of its equipment from a more expensive country whereas Russia does basically everything by itself.
And Russia spends larger share of its GDP on military.
The GDP corrected by purchasing power parity is 4000 billion for Russia and 2000 billion for South Korea. Russia spends some 3.5% of its GDP on military and South Korea 2.6%. That would give a 140 billion military spending for Russia and 52 billion for South Korea, which doesn’t take into account the fact that Russia gets its equipment cheaper by producing it all in Russia.
You sure that is still not latent catching up? Singapore, Hong Kong and, Macau have a higher GDP per capita then most western countries of course that may be because they are tax havens?
Well then why not extrapolate from Taiwan, which is not just the same race but the same ethnicity. So instead of looking at China’s potential as 11 Japans and wondering if they can achieve that, you can imagine 61 Taiwans. Still a hyperpower.
correction: 62 Taiwans since they will also anschluss the actual Taiwan, lol
The Korean military is too rigid. I don’t know about the Chinese. The Russian armed forces might also be too rigid, though that might not be fully true, because it’s often based on ww2 performance. (Which was not uniform throughout the war.)
In 2006 I attended a lecture by a Hungarian military historian about the First Chechen War 1994-96. The historian specializes in ww2 German Panzer troops and the battles in 1944-45 in Hungary. He was always extremely critical of the performance of Soviet and Hungarian armies of the time (relative to numbers and equipment), while he usually praised the tactical performance of the Germans.
However, as mentioned, this lecture was about the 1994-96 Chechen conflict, and he said that while the Russian command sent in the troops with inadequate equipment, supplies and a totally stupid battle plan (hence the enormous Russian losses), the local Russian commanders proved way more flexible (and better trained) than their forefathers had been back in ww2.
Regarding the Chinese, in their last war in 1979 against Vietnam their performance was extremely poor. But that was after three decades of Maoism. In the Korean War they were often skillful, especially given their inferior equipment and inadequate supplies. Since then they have spent a lot of effort on analyzing their past mistakes, as well as the past mistakes of others. So they might be significantly better than their reputation.
I think a lot of performance depends on training and how willing the central command is to allow initiative to the lower ranks. Military decision-making is probably not like poetry or composing a symphony, so not that much creativity is required. Maybe Twinkie will correct me, but I get the impression that most of the decisions to be made are relatively simple, the difficulty lays in
A) making the decisions very quickly and often based on inadequate information (i.e. taking educated guesses)
B) making the decisions under extremely stressful conditions
Both of these point to the importance of training and drill. And of course letting them make the decisions. Of course some people are easier to train, so I’d expect a Chinese or Russian army to always perform better than an African one, regardless of the level of training.
Theoretically, this post was about Moscow, but this is totally fine too.
I don’t live in Moscow, nor have I ever been there. Some of my colleagues were there for the ice hockey championship a few years ago (2016?), and they were impressed by it (as well as by St. Petersburg). During the World Cup even the Russophobic outlets praised the city. So I guess it’s run well.
Moscow is in my personal top 3 of “nicest megacities on the planet” (the other two being Tokyo and Singapore) and certainly the nicest megacity in a white majority country.
It’s light years ahead of shitholes like Paris, London or New York, and the nice European cities that are comparable to Moscow (Vienna comes to mind) are not comparable in size.
One of the things I like about Moscow that is not mentioned as often as its other good sides:
I would agree that Moscow is one of the world’s nicest cities of its size. Parts of it, such as the center, are stunningly beautiful, and it is remarkably clean over all. It puts New York and Paris to shame on that score.
Back during the Cold War, when Moscow was gray and depressing, those sympathetic to the Sovs would harp on the beauty of the Moscow metro (subway system). Since the end of the USSR, not only has Moscow refurbished its already impressive subway system, but it has expanded it significantly, adding multiple new stations and even new lines. When I would visit Washington, DC in the 1980s and 1990s, one could contrast the subway there with Moscow’s and make the points that, although Washington’s subway system lacked the majestic beauty of the best Moscow stations and had far fewer trains, it was at least clean, reliable and modern. Now the Washington subway trains are worn out, dirty, dingy, and fires plague the system. The system is a huge embarrassment. As for New York’s, well, nothing much has changed there. It is unreliable, hot, dirty, and grimey. Need I mention that both New York’s and Washington’s systems are much more expensive?
Yes – another major point in Moscow’s favor is the inclusion of multiple large, green parks. That makes it very livable indeed. Thanks for the statistics on this.
This is interesting to me. Russians these days consider such a statement to be modern Western SJW speak, rather than a throwback to the old communist “А у вас негров линчуют” slogans?
Thank you again for your fascinating perspective.
If you want some advice on how to survive next to a superpower, we have a whole class of Finnish politicians from the Cold War era who’d be happy to augment their retirement with some consulting fees. World class bootlickers who really knew how to suppress kneejerk phobias.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DmqXW5AXoAIdxPD.jpg
This is totally off topic here, it has nothing to do with the coming (or not) Chinese hyperpower.
Yakutia update
http://www.unz.com/akarlin/final-notes-russia-elections-2018/#comment-2260686
https://twitter.com/FarEasterner/status/1038792002379366408
I thought the gentrification had much improved the city since I lived there, actually I stayed opposite the US embassy for the WC. What has impressed is the massive investment in transport infrastructure, although with Crossrail, the Jubilee line extension and the DLR London has been a high performer in this regard. US cities are third world by comparison. I noticed new trains for the line connecting to Domodedovo but still a little slow.
On Moscow as a SWPL city:
The transformations in the center are indeed truly impressive, and gives Moscow a very first world vibe, even more impressive that Moscow was still somewhat of a shithole as late as 2014.
Some suggestions at the city level include cleaning up the taxi service. Get the remaining mafia taxis off the road, especially the Caucasians touting at the airports, and streamline the regulated Yandex taxis so that you can hail them off the streets too for tourists and older people. Another suggestion include expanding the reconstruction from the Garden Ring into anything within the Third Ring, and into as many side streets as possible. The area around Aviapark for example, would be impressive if further gentrified. The metro should translate most of their signs and maps into English. Also, the toll booths on the M11 are stupid: This should be the main airport highway instead of the congested, poor quality M10 that gives tourists a horrible impression.
Some suggestions at the national level include giving visa-free travel to citizens of all non-hysterical first world countries, namely Schengen, Taiwan, and Japan, and focus on promoting Moscow and St Petersburg as high end destinations. There’s too many low end mass tourists, especially from China, and high end tourists from all countries (including China itself) continue to shun Russia. Low end mass tourism doesn’t vibe well with the SWPL transformation of Moscow. Russia needs to show to the world that its days of being this cold, dark, miserable, dangerous country is way in the past. The World Cup was a great step in the right direction, but Russia should strive for a permanent, smaller scale “World Cup” for every single summer travel season.
I thought South Korea would make a good Mongoloid country to compare Russia to: it’s a big economy, and highly militarised by regional standards. For the record China is still rated below Russia in military power, despite producing everything domestically and having GDP and military budget many times higher than Russia.
My point is, Korea’s example gives a lie to Karlin’s assertion that “military power is a direct function of economic power”. Is it fair to describe SK as one-half of Russia in terms of military potential? Surely not. These countries are simply in two different leagues.
On China’s future:
Right now, China is at important crossroads; its decisions now can influence the rest of the century.
First of all, China is definitely becoming a technological superpower, and I believe will become a world leader in electronics, software/big data, and electric vehicles. Its universities will be renowned for STEM and many international students from the third world will go to get STEM degrees there. This is set in stone.
On the cultural front, not so sure. In order to pull off soft power that Japan or even South Korea did, censorship laws must be significantly relaxed, and this would be a deep structural change. I’m not exactly sure if the CCP has appetite or is even able to steer itself into significantly changing the way it governs its people while not throwing the baby out of the bath water. Keep in mind this change will be much, much more difficult than their decisions they made in the 80s, since back then China hit rock bottom with a destroyed country and ruined international reputation anyways.
If China goes through tough reforms radically changing the way the CCP governs while ensuring the country is stable the whole time, then we’d have a 25x South Korea with military on par with the United States. This will also likely require the Chinese people themselves to “reform” themselves as much as the state does, including changing rapidly a lot of their habits, mannerisms and values. But if this can be successfully pulled off, this will allow China to unseat the US as the #1 global superpower.
However, if China doesn’t go through the reforms and continues on its current trajectory, then we’d be seeing a more monocultural (90% titular nationality) market economy 21st century edition of the USSR, with Southeast Asia and perhaps Central Asia as its satellite states, and Russia playing the role of 1950s China before it inevitably gets tired of being a Chinese rug, just like Mao had enough of being a Soviet rug.
To add in the case if China doesn’t go through reforms: It will likely stagnate, as in growing 2-3% a year, once GDP per capita PPP hits 20,000, as an upper middle income nation. It will still be an economic powerhouse but won’t be leaving any country in the dust.
Judging by how Taiwan managed everything, I feel like the USSR 2.0 market economy edition situation coupled with stagnation as an upper-middle income nation is the likeliest.
I finally agree with you on a post.
No it wasn’t. It has gotten even better since then but was certainly past this stage by 2010 at the latest.
I was looking at Google Street View of random French cities the other day, some things I noticed:
Most of the cities, not just Paris, have this decayed, tired, worn out look to them. You could tell France as a nation has seen much better days, on its last gasps of breath as a first world nation, and is just clinging on to its glamorous history.
And in Europe, I wouldn’t be surprised if the V4 decides to go on its own as an actual bloc, and propels itself to first world status while remaining monoracially white. And the V4 as a bloc won’t be a minor nation, with a combined population of 65 million and anchored by Prague, Budapest, Krakow, and Warsaw. It would be the de-facto revived Austro-Hungarian Empire.
At this point, the V4 just need to use their experience working for the Western Europeans into establishing their own competing companies out of it, and entice its remaining workers in Western Europe back.
I don’t believe it works this way.
Let’s keep in mind that Taiwan = geopolitical non-entity = 0 (zero)
This means that “61 Taiwans” = “62 Taiwans” = 61 x zero = 0 (zero)
LOL
To give you guys another example: uniting 30 European countries into European Union did not create a hyperpower. The resulting entity is actually weaker than some of its constituent parts.
The point was about economic potential of ethnic Chinese, i.e. what GDP per capita can they reach.
Also even in the hypothetical example of 62 separate Taiwans uniting, they will still form one China (being the same people and all), while 30 European countries is 30 European countries.
It’s true. Though I am not particularly concerned about it because my own country is dying the same way, with no mass migration if we exclude the capital – the population explosion of native gypsies with the dying off and emigrating ethnic Bulgarians has actually created a worse demographic crisis than the one in France.
In a selfish way, I guess I should be kind of glad that Western European countries have the same problems, even if caused by different reasons.
Because this creates a small chance, a potential opening in the future where Western Europe turns very hard to the right, and this allows us to solve the gypsy question one way or another without being bombed by the west, like Serbia was when they took on the Albanian infestation in Kosovo.
Though to be honest, my people are kind of cucks so I don’t know. We did not solve the gypsy problem even while being allied with fucking Hitler, unlike the Croats who solved theirs. No, we were too busy virtue signalling by saving our jews.
That being said, gypsies were not an existential threat before and they are now, so hopefully we’ll grow a pair.
I assume you are from Bulgaria.
The demographic situation in Bulgaria, imo, is disastrous. Unlike Poles, Romanians, or Ukrainians who still retain a sense of belonging to their country, and only working abroad as a temporary measure to make more money to enjoy back home in the future, Bulgarians seem very different.
All the Bulgarians I know hate their homeland, and they desperately disassociate with it and try to become foreign. Their goals when immigrating is more of assimilation than to make money. When I told a Bulgarian friend who anglicized his name to assimilate better in America about the dire demographic situation in Bulgaria, he just laughed and said “that’s funny”. Obviously he has no desire to move back to Bulgaria. Another Bulgarian guy I know married a white American woman and we all know he’ll likely never go back again besides the odd vacation to see family.
You are comparing continental China to a small island, located at the intersection of global maritime trade. I’m surprised you didn’t try to bring up Singapore.
But even if you are correct, exactly how building lots and lots of cheap consumer electronics for export makes you a “hyperpower”? China fans are conflating economic output with international influence, as if they are the same thing.
Very much agree with the taxis, unless you buy a SIM or pony up the cash you still have to rely on the dodgy gypsy cabs. More reliable metered taxis would also be an improvement.
Very good point on metro, even when you can read the cryllic alphabet it is still hard work. Adding English and Chinese would cover most of the world’s likely tourists.
Chinese translations are not necessary for now, unless the Chinese can demonstrate that they are actually able to travel to Russia not by joining low end middle aged mass tour groups with an often illegal Chinese tour guide. I’d say that its not fun to be crowded out of sights by these types of tour groups.
So far, non-group tourists from China are almost nonexistent in Russia, which is a very bad situation for Russia’s tourism industry, as mass tourists from China since the collapse of the Ruble can give it a reputation as a low end destination, and this might, and will if left unchecked, deter high end tourists from other countries, including China itself.
In my opinion, in order to have Moscow fully live out its newly gained SWPL reputation on the global stage, a great first step would be a 15 day visa free program for all foreign nationals who buy a roundtrip ticket on Aeroflot, and a 5 day visa-free transit for those using Aeroflot to transit to a third country. This can be coupled with Aeroflot running ads all over the world focusing on both the sights and the street life of Moscow.
China has made significant headway in technology R&D, with a lot of good startups. Its smartphone and computer brands are definitely making significant headway globally. Lenovo, Huawei, and ZTE are the brands that stand out the most.
If it continues on this track, there’s no reason to see why Huawei, ZTE, Lenovo, Haier, etc. won’t get as big as say, Samsung, LG, or Sony, on the global consumer electronics scene.
Likewise, its a world leader in big data and quantum computing. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Chinese universities start having masses of international students in the STEM programs in say, 10 years.
Its cultural soft power that it will likely be an epic fail in, but even then it will allow China to be like the USSR for a while.
China’s self-conception for 3,000 years before the century of humiliation was the Middle Kingdom. The center of the universe, the place the whole world revolves around, whose Emperor was the one true sovereign of the world, peerless and unlimited in his authority. All other nations were barbarians who could only hope to become half as civilized as the Chinese, whose natural place in the world order was to submit and pay tribute to Chinese greatness.
This is the mindset of a superpower, one that came naturally to China and remained unwavering through the rise and fall of dynasty after dynasty, and was shattered only by a string of humiliating defeats to foreign powers in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. I don’t think it will take that much for it to return.
This matches my observations too, we assimilate in western countries very quickly. Good for those countries, bad for us as a people.
That being said some people do return eventually, and in any case if the gypsy problem is solved, the population will eventually rebound. That’s a big “if” though.
My best friend is a doctor in Germany. He not only speaks perfect German, but with his square jaw and blue eyes I don’t think Germans can tell he’s not one of them unless he gives his last name.
He makes much more money than he did here and is very good at his job. No obstacles to assimilation at all. Nevertheless he feels completely out of place there and will most probably return soon.
I know of many examples like him and for the rest, we don’t need rootless cosmopolitans and people with inferiority complexes anyway.
How does the gypsy problem negate the growth of ethnic Bulgarians?
By becoming a majority and fully transforming the country into a third world shithole, the otherwise inevitable rebound will never happen as the few remaining Bulgarians will emigrate or die.
Also Turkey might invade in the next 1-2 decades, as such a nice piece of land cannot forever belong to a dying country next to a growing one, and if the majority of the population is indifferent or supportive of said invasion, that will be the final nail in the coffin.
Even now the gypsies are preventing a revival of the countryside. A lot of people, including myself, would like to buy a house and move to live in some village as long as there’s internet there (not to mention such an environment is better for creating bigger families too), but it would be stupid to invest yourself in any place with a growing gypsy population, which is the case for most of the provinces.
Pretty depressing to hear that; am I also correct in assuming that the gypsy problem makes keeping a dacha (whatever you call it) much more problematic?
That is, if you’re not there all year round.
It really is awful. A small number of them can ruin an area or neighbourhood with begging, thefts, noise, keeping dogs they allow to roam freely, burning various waste, turning their living environment into a rubbish tip, stealing manhole covers etc. Any kind of nonviolent antisocial behaviour essentially.
What makes it worse is that they seem to be impervious to normal incentives (avoiding fines, prison, a criminal record, shame) and because they are usually non-violent they receive short sentences at best, for the few crimes they are convicted for. Not to mention they get an easy ride because of pressure brought to bear by Western Europeans who view them as exotic, charming, unjustly oppressed and so on, instead of just a rapidly multiplying destructive group.
Any reasonable program that has even a small chance of success in turning their behaviour around, such as forcing them to send their children to school instead of out begging, potentially giving them the skills and worldview required to function in mainstream society, requires such draconian measures that it cannot be implemented in the era of human rights watchdogs who love colourful dysfunctional minorities.
Sounds like typical Oriental despoty nonsense to me. Medieval Persia also thought it was the Center of the Universe, and everyone should bow to it, so what? You are missing the point: unwarranted self-importance is not what great power mindset (there is a special word for it in Russian – державность ) is about!
The key aspect of it is a seemingly limitless drive to expand, become involved, shape events and dominate everything around you. Roman empire had it, British Empire had it, USA has it, Russia today is trying to dominate its Near Abroad to the best of its ability. China spent its entire history in a self-imposed isolation. Even today the country remains mostly uninvolved in world affairs, carefully avoiding conflict.
Some say it’s a strategy. I think it’s Chinese nature and won’t change as the country grows wealthier.
You share this critisism?
https://twitter.com/JppMorgann/status/1038793293826539521
It’s the same all over the White world. We are either being pushed out by disagreeable NAMS, or priced out by Asians.
The problem is that China is supporting socialist losers who are running their own countries into the ground.
Malaysia actually discriminates against its Chinese minority just as bad as what the ANC does to whites, but without the violence since Malays are much less impulsive than blacks.
Guess who was supporting “socialist losers” in Malaysia.
Capital isn’t as tightly tied to land anymore.
Layman’s opinion – having first been to Moscow in 2008 and having been almost every year since, including this one…the change is massive. I used to dread going there before heading on to wife’s (pleasant) provincial town but now we look forward to spending time in Moscow – it’s as interesting as any Western metropolis just minus most of the third world flotsam and jetsam (saw a lot of whites working jobs that used to be exclusively the province of -stanites).
This is simply not true. China has been expanding its borders for thousands of years, while actively seeking to dominate the known to the Chinese part of the world. Self-isolation is a late and short-lived (compared to three thousand years of Chinese history) phenomenon
You are indeed correct.
Is Moscow and St. Petersburg really expected to sell well among Western European Gen Z and Millenials given that LGBT rights are stuck in 1895? That is unlikely to be popular with a demographic where support for gay marriage, not to mention LGBT is basically universal, how would your typical Gen Z react given knowing that their gay friends will be harassed in the streets for being openly gay? It might not be an important point here but it is an important point among the younger demographic outside this forum.
Was Moscow really bad in the late 2000s? I remember going there in 2010 and it was not too bad, I mean a bit grey but otherwiae pretty OK.
Does the typical Gen Z has gay friends? And they travel together, to boot?
How much did it hurt India’s appeal among them that gay sex as such was fully illegal in India? How much is South Korea hurt by their military searching gay hookup sites and apps to out their homosexual soldiers?
You know that less than half of generation z in the US identify as heterosexual right, and the rest identify as gay, pansexual, or bisexual? And that something like 10 percent of generation z men had same sex experiences? That means that the overwhelming majority of generation z people do know someone who is gay or bisexual, or identify as gay or bisexual themselves, which makes a place like Moscow unnattractive, unless it becomes Westernized culturally. For millennials trend is basically the same although slightly less pronounced. I guess it does not help that many of the people who are opposed to degeneracy like this also have hold contradictions when it come to moral positions, like believing that the LGBT should stay in the closet while being OK with men having activities that result in a lot of illegimate offspring and men having extramarital affairs.
Basically if you are looking at generation z, LGBT supporters are basically practicing what they are preaching instead of virtue signalling.
Do you people here know how out of touch you are, generally speaking, values-wise with people under 25?
Ever heard the saying from the 19th century about how if you scratch a Russia, find a Tartar, who’s not to say that your average Slavic Russian is not fact one fourth East Asian or one eight East Asian, especially eats of the Urals, or even west of the Urals? I mean someone who looks white can be as much as one fourth Chinese and not show it. And has anybody heard of the saying from the time of Bismarck that China begins east Bupadest? So Russia and Russians have always been regarded by Western Europeans as more of than Asiatic people and culture rather than really European.
Says the wignat who thinks that setting the SJWs against the IQists is the genius idea that will lead to the Fourth Reich.
Budapest itself it is the heart of Hunnic land.
“China” means Asia in this quote I guess. Because the Chinese have never ventured this far west, but many other brave warriors of Tengri have.
Pic related, it’s me and my bitch.
https://i.imgur.com/jOCFD0X.jpg
The leadership of the SJW is pretty smart, and as Stalin says, quality gas a quantity all of its own, and it will not be like 2 armies facing off against each other Waterloo style. more like Balkan and Lebanese low level. civil war, as an article about the 2nd American Civil war said.
Too melodramatic to be the truth. 中国, “Middle Kindgdom” is a geographic concept, it refers to the fact that China is bordered by natural obstacles on all four sides. It became a name for the Chinese nation only very recently, during Qing rule, when the occupying Manchu dynasty used it in a humiliating way: the classical ‘han’ and ‘hua’, referring to the Chinese people and Chinese culture, were replaced by a crude geographic moniker. It’s an early version of the ‘country of immigrants’ and ‘civic nationalism’ meme.
(Somebody should write a real history of China, without the silly overreactions and projections from centuries of foreign humiliation.)
No, I believe that was used as an insult about the Asianess of Slavs, as opposed to say, Germans, French, and Scots, back when the average person in London still looked liked the cast of Waterloo.
Well, if Karlin wants to, he can certainly come up with a graphic showing the east Asian or Semitic admixture of Slavic Russians east and west of the urals, and also for Ukranians, and are Finns and Finno Urgics basically white, or do they have a significant, more than 5 percent Asian Asian admixture, what about Turks, Tartars, and Chechens? As well as Armenians, Ossetians, and Azerbaijanis, because from their haplogroups, ethnic Persians are basically white, with a very small amount of Semitic admixture .
Well my memory is hazy, so I forgot if it was Asia or China, but it was used as an insult about how Hungarians were not really truly European, despite how they look, and that could also refer to Russians.
Because I remember Karlin claiming that Moscow was 90 percent white, and I was wondering how white the average ethnic Russian is, or are they white just like how Alexa Chung, or the average Brazilian white who is 25 percent Indian white?
Are Moscow’s traffic jams still awesomely bad?
Why can’t they extend the edit window beyond 5 minutes so I will not have to make so many posts?
AK: I assume because it’s sufficient for anyone who puts thought into their comments on most occasions, as opposed to spamming threads with their disjointed ramblings.
“As for the second major migration associated with the Mongol conquest of the medieval Russian principalities, its genetic traces is impossible to detect. This conclusion is mutually confirmed by the analysis of mtDNA and Y-chromosomes, and the data of anthropology. For example, the total frequency of Eastern-Eurasian mtDNA haplogroups in Russian populations of less than 2%: the same frequency is typical for the Western European Nations. For the Y-chromosome typical “Mongolian” marker is haplogroup C (the medium was believed to be Genghis Khan, – this haplogroup is most common among Mongols and related peoples). However, for the Russian population this haplogroup almost completely absent (frequency below 1%, i.e., from the formal standpoint of genetic polymorphism on this basis, the Russian population can be considered fully “genetically European”).”
E. V. Balanovskaya And O. P. Balanovsky. Russian gene pool of the Russian plain. M., 2007. P. 296
“Thus, the Russian population of Eastern Europe in the anthropological indicators or coincide with the average Western European , or deviate from them, remaining within the limits of variability of the Western European groups…”.
Bunak, V. V., the Origin and ethnic history of the Russian people according to anthropological data. M., 1965
I am just asking this because I remember people saying that the Tocharians were white and then turning out that they were approximately one fourth Siberian.
Not comparable, the Manchus were conquerors ruling separate realms. This is more similar to, say, when Poland was renamed Vistula Land.
Russia shouldn’t mourn the absence of people who worship a perverse genetic-dead-end psychological disorder and lifestyle. Russia doesn’t need those brainwashed people corrupting the minds of its own people.
There are plenty of normal heterosexual people, including families like mine, who would love to visit Moscow and SPB. We would lose interest if they started to have homosexual marches, displays of public perversity, propaganda for homosexuality, etc., like we do here in the Disunited States.
https://www.ocregister.com/2018/09/08/a-generation-plans-an-exodus-from-california/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
Yes, disingenuousness among so-called trad youth is a serious problem. They pick and choose the traditional ways that suit their (often degenerate) lifestyle preferences.
This tweet is a good example of idiotic China hype that annoys me so much. To start, there is no “China-US war” going on. Or at the very least China has not been participating in it. So the “war” is happening in the author’s imagination. There is no “China orbit” (Hello, AK!). China cannot possibly “lose countries”, because it never had them.
It is obvious that the author is eager for China to assume the role that USSR was playing: a full spectrum challenger Western system. And there is no shortage of commenters like this at unz.com, as people are desperately trying to wish China into an actual superpower, to take on the evil ZOG or whatever. But in reality it’s mostly wishful thinking, based on some very superficial understanding of the Chinese.
China and the US simply can’t afford to have a war when they are each other’s largest trading partner, the economies are intertwined, and form the third largest source of foreign visitors for each other.
For example, take tourism: Around 2.5 million Americans travel to China a year, around half of whom are non-Chinese Americans, and around 3.5 million Chinese travel to America a year. While Russians are definitely closing in the gap, Americans are still the single largest non-Asian group of tourists you’ll see, especially in Xi’an. And we all know how common are Chinese visitors in the US.
And for trade, we all know how many Chinese manufacturers depend on exports to the US market to make a living, and how much manufacturing US companies do in China. For American consumer goods companies, the most common largest overseas market is China, where in some cases the Chinese market exceeds the US market.
The most hardcore gays won’t go to Russia.
While Russia doesn’t (and should not) need to adopt Western institutions, it definitely needs to advertise itself as being transformed into a SWPL country with the same amenities that you’d expect in the West, albeit cleaner, safer, whiter, and with a Russian twist.
Given how SWPL Moscow and St. Petersburg are, Western gays should be OK as long as they dress normally, stay in the center, and don’t show any more affection than what a regular heterosexual couple would in Russia, and I wouldn’t see why Western gays wouldn’t enjoy seeing the sights during the day and hanging out in the SWPL places at evening/night.
Once large numbers
of neoliberals or even gays from Western Europe or even the US start going to Russia and have surprisingly positive experiences, finding Moscow/SPB very similar to the V4 cities they already like just on a larger scale, a lot of the anti-Russian hysteria in the West will die down. What Russia should fear the most right now, is no one coming to visit and verifying in person that media /= reality.
Some people also thought like this before the First World War.
Agreed. Pretty strange argument.
The German elites were highly Anglophile, and Germans were the biggest foreign contingent at Oxford University in 1914.
The intensity of trade between them as a percentage of GDP would not be recovered until the 60s or 70s IIRC.