Replying to
@MSP_SMIMSA@noauthority.social @Bernard@friends.ravergram.club The quintessential "conservative" position.
Remote
QuisSicutDeus
@QuisSicutDeus@poa.st
pleroma 2.10.2-442-gb68f13b9-developSicut Judæis non
If your principles forbid you from pursuing your interests, then what good are your principles?
#nobot
If your principles forbid you from pursuing your interests, then what good are your principles?
#nobot
0 Followers
0 Following
35 Posts
Joined February 27, 2024
Replying to
The piece is "Camino de Compostella" The performers are lost to history (my mind).
Replying to
You were my gateway into many and varied aspects of White culture here on Fedi. The only way I can repay is by giving you something beautiful in return. Please know I will continue to pray for you and yours.
Nihil non potest fieri Deo juvante
Replying to
If we continue refusing to organize it will only get worse.
Replying to
I am not typically one who enjoys watching suffering for it's own sake. But this...
This is pure, .999 gold.
@Scarlett@nicecrew.digital getting ready for girl's night out.
She's out there, Anon. You just have to look.
Replying to
@NoDoxGregBrady@poa.st @Terry@poa.st I would rather die in a shoot out with the draft board than die for ZOG.
Replying to
Best of both worlds. Just keep the ports and ben gurion closed so the rats cannot flee.
Replying to
Brian Herbert's writing is imminently forgettable. He does not possess his father's talent.
Replying to
Nah, he just saying "Fuck all that jewy shit."
Replying to
I can tell you, from experience, there is nothing in the world quite like giving your child a kiss in mama's belly.
Replying to
@TrevorGoodchild @GrungeQueef The weird part is one can draw a line from that to this and do it PLAUSIBLY.
Replying to
@cjd@pkteerium.xyz @jaff@mk.magicka.org @Merc@freerobuxextremist.com By "the thing" what do you mean? I've been outa the loop for a bit.
Replying to
Whoever voted TACO Tuesday: You were correct.
Shame on anyone who tried to put happening sauce on a nothingburger.
I found this helpful when I first allowed myself to explore the ideas of National Socialism.
My conditioning was very difficult to break. When it did finally break though... I went head-first into the deep water.
My conditioning was very difficult to break. When it did finally break though... I went head-first into the deep water.
Replying to
It is absolutely, 100% true. To our shame and dishonour. And every innovation spawned by the horror known as V2 is tainted with the same sin.
Read this and try to figure out why the jews at the state department have done ANYTHING they could to drive russia away from us since the fall of the soviet union. When looking through this lens, understanding their goal is to break Western (White European heritage populations) power and influence is not too hard.
Remember; WE (White European heritage stock) ARE AMALEK in their twisted, sick religion and worldview.
-------------------------------------------------
Mackinder's Dread Realized
Harold Mackinder wrote in 1904 that the era of European maritime predominance established 400 years earlier was coming to an end. Western naval and colonial powers had previously been able to outflank and dominate the Asian landmass through superior technology. But the consolidation of great continental-sized land powers such as the Russian Federation and potentially China—combined with changes in land transportation—meant that insular maritime democracies including Great Britain would have a more difficult time maintaining their global position. Mackinder asked his readers to envision continental Europe, continental Asia, and continental Africa as a single “World Island,” possessing most of the world’s population and industrial potential.
The core of this world island he called the Heartland, inaccessible to sea power—essentially, Russia, Mongolia, Tibet, and Central Asia, including parts of China and Iran. If the world island were ever united under a single political entity, with a base in the Heartland, then it would possess overwhelming economic and military advantages over the outer crescent of geographically insular maritime powers, such as Great Britain, Japan, and the United States. Mackinder’s recommendation was for these maritime powers to encourage the creation of geopolitical buffer zones, for example in Eastern Europe.
Writing in the early 1940s, Nicolas Spykman modified Mackinder’s formulations by pointing to the existence of what he called an amphibious Rimland—located in between the Heartland and its great offshore islands—and stretching from Western Europe around the Middle East, across India, ending in coastal China. Spykman pointed out that most of the world’s productive potential was in the Rimland, not within the Heartland. Control of the Rimland therefore meant control of the world—precisely what was at stake during both world wars—and this would be determined by struggles between mixed alliances, rather than by simply lining up sea powers versus land powers straightforwardly.
If the U.S. failed to maintain control over vital sea and airspace in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, then some other power eventually would. Even a predominant U.S. influence in South America’s southern cone could hardly be taken for granted, given the vast distances involved, and if that influence were lost then a hemispheric defense would collapse into something more constrained and impoverished. Taken as a whole, the Rimland’s economic and military weight pointed to no secure resting place for Americans in the absence of internal Old World balances, and these balances would have to be actively upheld by the United States. As he put it, America’s “main political objective, both in peace and in war, must therefore be to prevent the unification of the Old World centers of power in a coalition hostile to her own interests.”
What is the geopolitical situation in our own time? Since the 1990s, there clearly have been some very significant shifts within the international balance of power, in broad alignment with Mackinder’s predictions over a century ago. The single greatest gravitational shift in relative economic and military weight has been from the Atlantic toward the Pacific, and from Europe toward Asia. The Indo-Pacific, rather than Europe’s Western half, is the focus of the world’s greatest economies, militaries, and geopolitical ambitions. In particular, the dramatic long-term growth in China’s economic capabilities allows it to build greater diplomatic and military assets.
The blockade of Iran will accelerate the development of the railway network in Central Asia linking Iran to China's industrial base. While the railways will not be able to replace maritime trade, once the U.S. lifts the blockade, they will reinforce the Iranian economy and tighten China's grip over the economies of the region. This is just one of the many ways the 3rd Gulf War backfired.
Remember; WE (White European heritage stock) ARE AMALEK in their twisted, sick religion and worldview.
-------------------------------------------------
Mackinder's Dread Realized
Harold Mackinder wrote in 1904 that the era of European maritime predominance established 400 years earlier was coming to an end. Western naval and colonial powers had previously been able to outflank and dominate the Asian landmass through superior technology. But the consolidation of great continental-sized land powers such as the Russian Federation and potentially China—combined with changes in land transportation—meant that insular maritime democracies including Great Britain would have a more difficult time maintaining their global position. Mackinder asked his readers to envision continental Europe, continental Asia, and continental Africa as a single “World Island,” possessing most of the world’s population and industrial potential.
The core of this world island he called the Heartland, inaccessible to sea power—essentially, Russia, Mongolia, Tibet, and Central Asia, including parts of China and Iran. If the world island were ever united under a single political entity, with a base in the Heartland, then it would possess overwhelming economic and military advantages over the outer crescent of geographically insular maritime powers, such as Great Britain, Japan, and the United States. Mackinder’s recommendation was for these maritime powers to encourage the creation of geopolitical buffer zones, for example in Eastern Europe.
Writing in the early 1940s, Nicolas Spykman modified Mackinder’s formulations by pointing to the existence of what he called an amphibious Rimland—located in between the Heartland and its great offshore islands—and stretching from Western Europe around the Middle East, across India, ending in coastal China. Spykman pointed out that most of the world’s productive potential was in the Rimland, not within the Heartland. Control of the Rimland therefore meant control of the world—precisely what was at stake during both world wars—and this would be determined by struggles between mixed alliances, rather than by simply lining up sea powers versus land powers straightforwardly.
If the U.S. failed to maintain control over vital sea and airspace in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, then some other power eventually would. Even a predominant U.S. influence in South America’s southern cone could hardly be taken for granted, given the vast distances involved, and if that influence were lost then a hemispheric defense would collapse into something more constrained and impoverished. Taken as a whole, the Rimland’s economic and military weight pointed to no secure resting place for Americans in the absence of internal Old World balances, and these balances would have to be actively upheld by the United States. As he put it, America’s “main political objective, both in peace and in war, must therefore be to prevent the unification of the Old World centers of power in a coalition hostile to her own interests.”
What is the geopolitical situation in our own time? Since the 1990s, there clearly have been some very significant shifts within the international balance of power, in broad alignment with Mackinder’s predictions over a century ago. The single greatest gravitational shift in relative economic and military weight has been from the Atlantic toward the Pacific, and from Europe toward Asia. The Indo-Pacific, rather than Europe’s Western half, is the focus of the world’s greatest economies, militaries, and geopolitical ambitions. In particular, the dramatic long-term growth in China’s economic capabilities allows it to build greater diplomatic and military assets.
The blockade of Iran will accelerate the development of the railway network in Central Asia linking Iran to China's industrial base. While the railways will not be able to replace maritime trade, once the U.S. lifts the blockade, they will reinforce the Iranian economy and tighten China's grip over the economies of the region. This is just one of the many ways the 3rd Gulf War backfired.
Replying to
@AntelopeHill@poa.st Is there a chance AH will be able to re-print these books?
pleasesayyespleasesayyespleasesayyespleasesayyespleasesayyes
There are no real people on Fedi, it's just my multiaccounts. To prove this, i will post this on every alt of mine.
RT: https://poa.st/objects/91bf3807-598b-4970-bf2d-b82b9b0f88e7
RT: https://poa.st/objects/91bf3807-598b-4970-bf2d-b82b9b0f88e7
Replying to
I figured as much. This is also why I think it's mis-direction. Unless it's the Orange Retard's 47d checkers and they do it anyways because who would believe what was publicly discussed.
Replying to
Hmm... How'd you catch a picture of me leaving the https://returntotheland.org Spring Conference last evening?
Replying to
lol, when you give them the money to pay you for the weapons... I guess this is a risk.
Replying to
They're either gonna be protected as pressure relief or promptly thrown into ASIO gulags.
Replying to
they don't even need to man karg. Saturation bombardment with artillery (it's only 16 miles off the coast, well within even heavy mortar (HM-16) range) and drones (shahed, quads, whatever) and ballistic missiles. Make it an untenable hellscape 24x7 and after a few days even the most hardened soldier will mentally break.