When Power wants something

So there's been another Islamic terrorist attack, this time in Spain. A dozen dead. This time though, funnily, the terrorists didn't kill themselves. They're still on the loose. Apparently the main actor is a 17 year old Moroccan. Even if they catch him, as a minor he'll probably get a slap in the wrist and some community service.

After Charlottesville, people should have noticed that when Power wants something, it gets it. It will take any means necessary, put any resources needed to achieve it. If the Power in the West wanted to get rid of Islamic terrorism, it could do it.

As an example, China wants to get rid of Islamic terrorism. Pretty damn strongly. So what do they do?

I just love this picture. The huge banner on the mosque says: Love the Party, Love the Country. On a mosque. In rural Kashgar. Which is 100% Uyghur. Look at it again. "Love the party". They don't say that back in China proper. In Beijing you would get laughed at for being so in your face. But the Uyghurs must take it.

This of course is enforced by a huge security apparatus, killing suspects on sight, and a police state that would've scared the shit out of Orwell. You haven't seen Internet control like China's. Although I hear Germany's is getting close.

So anyway, it isn't hard. Xinjiang is 50% Muslim, and increasingly so. But China will take care of it. It can be done. When there's a will. In Europe there obviously isn't.

[…] When Power wants something […]

All correct but for this: "So anyway, it isn’t hard. Xinjiang is 50% Muslim, and increasingly so. But China will take care of it. It can be done. When there’s a will. In Europe there obviously isn’t." There is no will because Power does not want to deal with the situation - yet - because it is not in the interests. However, even if the left do maintain power then one day they will do something about it, but it will not be like the Chinese. It will be a mixture of co-opting Muslim women, creating a Muslim middle-class and for those Muslim men who refuse, they will allow them to create a pointless political party and for the violent - they will be sent to medical institutions.

The interesting thing is that the CCP has effectively dissuaded the muslims from congregating in mosques By showing Islam as powerless in the face of the CCP. Who wants to associate with the powerless? If you don't have a place to congregate, you're dead. And India thinks they can beat China! Hahahahaha!

Beat China at what? Invade Tibet and take it over?

I'm not sure there's enough money around to create a Black middle-class, a Muslim middle-class and a Hispanic middle-class on the public purse.

When I try to bring up Jim's blog all I get is this: "Your PHP installation appears to be missing the MySQL extension which is required by WordPress." ?

I'll ask him.

Win a glorious war to save the future of democracy or something like that.

[…] Source: Bloody Shovel […]

It's up now. Thanks.

There can be no will as long as there is adherence to the religion of Human Rights. The smartest thing I read on how to renounce this religion in France was written by Pierre Manent in 2015, but he was misunderstood, especially by patriots. They failed to see the upside of granting specific rights and obligations to Muslims, which would be to have the State drawing a formal distinction within the population between Muslims and non-Muslim French people. Contrary to positive discrimination, such a policy would be strictly incompatible with the Human Rights narrative. It would establish an official separation line between "us" and "them". Such an official separation line would accomplish a needed break with Progressivism. China doesn't adhere to human rights, and wisely so. Thus it can discriminate between citizens of different categories.

A Chinese scholar (graduate-level exchange student/postdoc) is in the U.S. studying "non-profits." Such a person is writing a draft of a scholarly paper apologizing for Mao's ban on non-governmental charitable organizations, where the ban had been lifted only recently and the paper is the telling of the great things now taking place in China. Has that person "gone Progressive"? Is that person trying to be polite to U.S. university hosts? Is that person faithful to the current CCP party line in criticizing Mao, much like Krushchev initiated criticism of Stalin? This relates to subject at hand of the hard line of the CCP on cultural diversity. Without attribution and through a "cut out", I suggested that there may been pragmatic reasons to keep the NGOs out -- the experience of Myanmar as explained here comes to mind -- and that the paper need not belabor the criticism of Mao on this particular point. The author is probably wondering "why am I being told this" -- if she only knew, if she only knew.

I guess it could relate to the ongoing border dispute.

Yes.

In the US? we don't have enough money to create much of a middle class period wages measured as percentage of GDP are less than half what they were in the 1970's and the number of people on welfare /food aid,/underemployed for their skill level even ignoring population aging is enormous

Agreed, so there strategy there is not likely to work, so more medical institutions then!

No doubt some would be Sardar Patels covet Tibet and view it as naturally part of a future Indian sphere of influence, but really they just want to one up China in something, anything, the latest border impasse being just another excuse. I suspect at this point the issue is no longer about any bit of dirt but more important status which is a finite resource. The Indians have grand ambitions, grander than most Westerners are really aware of, and they crave recognition as a new rising power. The US is either willing to play along with this or just as equally likely as to share India's self conception but the Chinese aren't willing to play ball. This would mean after all a diminishing of their own relative status. The CCP has a low opinion of Indians not shared by the West and certainly not Indians themselves. The average Chinese basically have no conception of India beyond curry, bollywood, and open defecation. The military and foreign affairs bureaucracies on the other hand responsible for India relations does have one, it just so happens to mirror that of the Straits Chinese. They basically see the Indians elites as arrogant but delusional shysters of no account that can be ignored if they don't actively engage in bandwagoning with the US. The caste Hindu both as an individual and as a race has a more than healthy opinion of himself and his own capabilities which has been fueled in no small part by Western flattery. An opinion which they've come to realize the Chinese are openly contemptuous of. This leads to no small amount of resentment which manifests itself in marginal irritants being magnified so that they can claim some type of psychological victory over China by both demonstrating resistance and more importantly to be mentioned in the same sentence and associated with, China.

When power want's something, it get's it, is a good definition of what qualifies as a power. But it doesn't go beyond that. Who has power and how much? Sure, Europe could get rid of Islamic terrorism, if the the government would want it. The governments of Hungary or Poland have the will and hence no Islamic terrorism. Germany, Italy, Spain, France want Islamic Immigration and therefore keep their borders open. They are certainly powerful enough to keep the police and military from closing the borders. Are they powerful enough to order the police or the mlitary to do something the officers don't like to do? Yes, to some extent. Historically, blatant disobidience is a rare exception. Incompetence is far from rare, and it can be faked easily. Police and military officers have their sympathies and opinions. They will act accordingly within the frame of their orders. If you hold a rally, it makes a huge difference which side the officers are sympathetic to. For example Merkel's government wanted Pegida rallies to stop. The never managed in Dresden. Everywhere a lot depended on the police. I've seen police charge on horseback into a antifa group blocking the path of a pegida rally. I've also seen the police not clearing a blockade of about 20 antifa and using force (pepper spray and sticks) to disperse a right wing rally, five minutes after their alloted time was up. You don't know where loyalties are, until it really counts. Rallies and activism can give you an idea where the loyalties of the police are. Activism might even influence them.

Human rights are evil. China is evil. God is good.

This guy is banned, let this be a warning of what kind of comments are not accepted.