Tag Archives: europe

Was Genghis Khan the first Communist?

Fine, I must concede the title is bit click-baity, however I do find many accounts of the alleged accomplishments of Genghis Khan and the Mongol empire somewhat questionable. On top of that there seems to be sort of modern attempt to paint Genghis Khan as some sort of progressive good guy. Let’s dig in.

First I should explain some of the background of where I’m coming from. I’ve written in the past how I don’t think that Marco Polo went to China, but to Cathay which was another kingdom. I’ve also expressed criticism of the official history of the Great Wall of China, which may or may not be relevant to this article. I’ve also discussed the theory put forward by others that the name Mongol did not used to refer to the people we we think of as Mongols today, but to another race of people. I’ll add links below.

I should also point out that we cannot know much of what truly happened in ancient history. What we think of history is always based on interpretation, which may be liable to corruption due to lack of evidence as well as political and ideological bias. How do we know, for example, that Julius Ceasar existed, or the very least, the did the things attributed to him such as being a proficient military commander in conquering barbarian tribes in Europe and then falling victim to the conspiring senate? There are some old coins that supposedly depict Julius Caesar, a caesar of that name probably did exist, but can we know the stories we associate with him actually took place? How do we know that the character wasn’t invented by Shakespeare, for instance? As Napolean infamously said “History is a set of lies agreed upon.


Primary Sources

There are loads accounts in books and on the internet depicting the achievements the Mongol Empire, but most of them are simply people repeating what the experts have said. To glean any actual clues to the veracity of the claims you have to go to the primary sources, which would be texts written around the time of the historical events or artifacts from that period.

As an example of shoddy evidence for the historicity of Genghis Khan we need look no further than Wikipedia. The article on the Khan states how he conquered China, Korea and Central Asia. After that the article states: “Many of these invasions repeated the earlier large-scale slaughters of local populations. As a result, Genghis Khan and his empire have a fearsome reputation in local histories.” After this sentence there is a link to a book titled Mongolia: a guide to economic and political developments by Ian Jeffries. The title does did not fill me with confidence as it sounds like the book discussed Mongolia in a more modern context. I did, however, manage to find it on the internet and checked out pages 5-7 that supposedly explain Wikipedia’s claims.

On page 5 it says “Mongolia built the world’s largest contiguous empire in the thirteenth century under Genghis Khan”. So apparently it was bigger than Alexander the Great’s, the Roman Empire or the British Empire. Quite an achivement for a bunch of horseriding nomads. What sort of technology or bureaucratic system did they have to manage that? Apparently by landmass the British Empire was larger, but Mongols supposedly had the largest continous empire. It also said the Mongols managed to kill “30 to 60 million people across Asia and Europe”.

Page 6 states that Korean and Mongolian elites engaged in considerable intermarriage in the thirteenth century and Koreans believe their ancestors come from Mongolia. That is the only evidence of “large-scale slaughters of local populations” and “fearsome reputation in local histories” that were on pages 5-7 of Jeffries’ book. However, ultimately this only proves that Wikipedia is an untrustworthy source for information, which is not news.

There is a book known nowadays best by the name The Secret History of the Mongols. It was supposedly written back in the 13th or 14th century, and the introduction describes it as follows:

“This book, known to Mongols as the Tobchi’an [Tobcha’an]
or ‘History’, has appeared under a variety of names,
including The Secret History of the Mongols, The Life of
Chinggis Qahan, The True Record of Chinggis Qahan, and
The Secret History of the Yuan Dynasty. It has been
translated into many languages, including English,
Japanese, French, German, Chinese, Russian, Hungarian,
and Polish. Like Chinggis himself, the book is highly
controversial. We cannot be sure when it was written or
who wrote it. I myself argue below that it was written in
1228, but other scholars date it to 1240 or 1323. Whatever
the case, the book is unique, as the only available account
of the life of Chinggis Qahan [Genghis Khan].”

It is not known who wrote it and when, and it is the only account of the life of Genghis Khan. Sounds dubious to me. It might as well been written as a fiction, or a deliberate deception.

The Secret History of the Mongols mentions two other so-called primary cources. The first one is this:

“The War Record of the Holy Hero (Chinggis Qahan), by
Qoriqosun, 1266–1273.48 This book was published by the
Institute of National History established by Qubilai Qahan
at Daidü in 1264. For details, see The War Record of the
Holy Hero, p. 4. Qoriqosun was a chairman of the Institute
of National History after 1264. He was not only a Mongol
scholar but a court painter who painted the portrait of
Chinggis Qahan and other Qahans in 1278–1279.”

I could find no record of this book existing on the internet at least. Maybe it exists only in another language such as Mongolian or Chinese. However, I do not find this a credible source either, since if it provided important evidence on the Mongols, you’d think it had been translated.

The third one is even less credible:

“The Real History of the Mongol Qahans, published by
the Institute of National History in 1303–1304 in Mongol
and Chinese by an anonymous author. Unfortunately, this
work has not been found.”

The work has not been found? What does this mean? How can they claim this book is a source of any kind? Maybe the book never existed to begin with.

How about the physical evidence then? If the Mongols had this vast militaristic empire shouldn’t there be Mongol forts or other structures littered about in their former territory like central Asia or Russia? I couldn’t find any. There should plenty of Mongol artifacts such as weapons and armour littered about in their former territory. I managed to find a few pictures of these on the internet, but very few, and most pictures seem to be of later Mongol equipment, or simply replicas. I’ll take a look at the Mongol armour in more detail later on.

I must point out that I am an amateur when it comes to history, and specifically Mongol history, so the lack of primary evidence may speak more of my own lack of ability and access to resources than the existence of those resources, so I am not going to make any definitive statement to the existence or non-existence of Genghis Khan or the Mongol Empire. Yet were all of the claims of this vast empire self-evident fact, I would expect the evidence to be abundant, which it does not seem to be. If someone can point me to some sort of primary evidence that I can verify for myself, I’d appreciate it.


The Progressive Khan

Jeffries’ Mongolia: A Guide to Economic and Political Developments has a quote from The Times on page 5 stating that “The Mongol empire was the first to know religious tolerance. In the capital, Karakorum, churches, mosques and temples stood side by side. In his empire women had equal rights with men, even among subject peoples.”

First of all, The Times is not a credible source when it comes to history. And the two statements made by them are ridiculous. What does it mean that the Mongols were “the first to know religious tolerance”? It’s a nonsensical blanket statement. Do they mean that no society in history had any sense of religious tolerance before the Mongols? How about the Religion of Peace, Islam? At least according to liberals, it used to be so tolerant. If they had said “compared to earlier empires in history, the Mongol Empire showed a much greater deal of tolerance of religion” I could take it with some degree of seriousness.

Women having “equal rights with men” sounds like utter nonsense. Surely they did not have equal rights with men in any sense that the modern West conceives of the idea? Did the women fight alongside men in battle? Did they play an equal part in slaughtering 30-60 million people? Perhaps the position of women was good among Mongols when compared to Christian, Muslims or the Chinese, but once again the article did not say that. Nor is there any evidence to qualify the statement.

The Times is not the only outlet to make Genghis Khan sound like a progressive warlord. Dr. Timothy May of North Georgia College and State University wrote in his article that there was religious tolerance “throughout the empire”. If I think about what it means, I suppose the Mongols might have been fairly callous when it came to religion. If they conquered Christians, Muslims or Buddhists, they only wanted obedience and did not care what gods their subjects adhere to. However, I would call it disinterest rather than tolerance, if that was the case. At least the writers should qualify this alleged tolerance with some details.

An article in The Spectator says: “the same man who is said to be responsible for the deaths of a world record 40 million is also noted — admittedly less widely — for his religious tolerance, enlightened diplomacy and championing of women’s rights.” Same propaganda of Genghis Khan having been a progressive conqueror.

Another blog on WordPress, Course Correction: An Insider’s Look at Mormon Culture, at least tries to clarify these progressive tendensies of Genghis Khan in some way:

“Although they adopted literacy, arts, and sciences from other countries and tolerated Taoism, Islam, Buddhism, and Christianity, Mongols kept their own culture—including an active role of women in their social and political life. Mongol society lacked the belief that female sexual purity was a value to be defended at all costs—including defense of and seclusion of women. When one tribe was ambushed by another, the men fled on horses so they could live to fight another day. Captured women were taken as wives by the conquering warriors. If the men escaped, they attacked and recaptured the women. A recaptured wife might be pregnant with her captor’s child, but the child was raised by her husband as his own.

While the warriors were off sacking and looting—sometimes for more than a year at a stretch— Mongol women ran the country. Mongolian girls as well as boys were educated when schools were established. Both Genghis Khan’s wife and mother influenced his governing decisions.

True, Mongolian women did not have total equality, and prosperous Mongols could take more than one wife. Yet, compared to women in 13th century Europe, China, Persia, and the Arab world, Mongolian women had a good deal.”

I do not know how accurate these statements are, but at least they are sensible.

I do however get the impression that there is some sort of liberal agenda at play in promoting, this idea of the progressive Khan. In fact, I have two different scenarios: Genghis Khan was the first Communist leader of powerful nation, or this is just another Marxist ploy in attempting to downplay the achievements of Europe by praising non-Europeans.

Perhaps, there had been a proto-Communist cabal that put Genghis Khan into power. After all, if main stream history is accurate, Genghis Khan did what Communists tend to do; wage war and kill a lot of people. Mao supposedly killed 45 million in four years during the great leap forward. Stalin had 60 million killed according to some estimates. So according to history, the Mongols caused more deaths than Mao, and equally the death’s of Stalin. Of course the 20th century Communists achieved their deaths in a shorter time-span, as the Mongols took a century or two (and several Khans) to do it, but they did not have access to modern technology so I think it evens out. At least according to the presumed liberals who are praising Genghis Khan, he was similar to modern Communist leaders; the was a violent conqueror who caused millions of deaths, but later on he is being hailed as a progressive hero. Of course there is the difference that Genghis Khan probably didn’t spend as much effort on killing his own people as Commies tend to do.

I think the second scenario is more likely that liberals who hate Europe and everything related to it, find any excuse ignore the achievements of Europe, and praise the achievements of non-Europeans peoples, be their achievements factual or fictional. I am not of the camp that thinks that Europeans excell in everything and should be praised for everything, I simply think credit should be given when it is due, and not given when it is not due.


Feats of the Empire

Let’s get back to the Mongols and their alleged feats. The Secret History of the Mongols states that “just two million Mongols, with 129,000 cavalrymen, could establish the largest land empire in world history.” Two million people with a bit more than 100,000 cavalrymen were able to conquer the largest land empire in history, and butcher up to 60 million people? I don’t find it credible, although possibly this two million refers only to the Mongols who were alive during the time of Genghis Khan, and during his day they hadn’t killed all of those millions yet. They had no access to modern weaponry or transport, they did have even the telegraph, nothing like that. I might believe this if the people they conquered had been weak pacifists who were unwilling or unable to fight back, but they weren’t.

I think something doesn’t add up, yet I don’t claim to know what the truth is. Perhaps it lies somewhere in the middle. Maybe the Mongols did manage to conquer some places like China and Korea, but it doesn’t sounds credible they’d be able to do all that they supposedly did. Or maybe the Mongol Empire is a fabrication to begin with, possibly to cover-up the existence of another race of people or empire, or a coalition of races.

I don’t know the truth, but I still have more to speculate about the Mongols and the possible Mongol deception, but I’ll do that at a later date.




Marco Polo did not go to China: https://concordiaabchao.wordpress.com/2016/01/17/marco-polo-did-not-go-to-china/

By whom, when and why was Great Wall of China built?: https://concordiaabchao.wordpress.com/2017/05/08/by-whom-when-and-why-was-great-wall-of-china-built/

Genghis Khan: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genghis_Khan

Mongolia: A Guide to economic and political developments: https://books.google.fi/books?hl=en&lr=&id=xxB9AgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Mongolia:+A+Guide+to+Economic+and+Political+Developments&ots=5OIy5iR-0Z&sig=PnZ2WZHCm7efX95t4aFpKD_aOgM&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

Genghis Khan (1165-1127): https://web.archive.org/web/20100306053246/http://www.accd.edu/sac/history/keller/mongols/empsub1.html

Genghis Khan was tolerant, kind to women – and a record-breaking mass-murderer: https://www.spectator.co.uk/2014/07/the-mongol-empire-by-john-man-review/

Genghis Khan was tolerant, kind to women – and a record-breaking mass-murderer: https://www.spectator.co.uk/2014/07/the-mongol-empire-by-john-man-review/

Genghis Khan and Women’s Rights :https://annmjohnson.wordpress.com/2012/04/13/genghis-khan-and-womens-rights/


Is this the organization that has contrived the terror attacks in Europe?

The Bureau of False Flags might have been found, although it seems more like a private corporation than a governmental bureau. In his interview with SGT Report Ole Dammegard mentioned a website he found: Crisis Solutions, or Crisis Cloud. This organization seems to be involved in staging crisis simulations.


Can it really be this obvious? “The clue is in the name”. The logo sort of looks like 666 and tentacles like Ole Dammegard pointed out.


The Company

The website of Crisis Solutions says they are “Europe’s leading crisis simulation company” and they’ve been doing this since 2000. Their managing director is Richard Whitby. According to his LinkedIn he’s been in that role since 2003. Whitby brag’s in his message on the website that:

“Crisis Solutions delivered the very first ‘Market-Wide Exercise’, involving more than 100 organisations and thousands of participants in a day-long simulated terror attack on London’s financial sector. We were also a key part of the UK Government’s preparations to provide resilience against cyber attacks during the London Olympics.”

Could this “simulated terror attack on London’s financial sector refer to the 7/7 attack in London in 2005?

One interesting point is that Crisis Solutions was started already in 2000, that was before 9/11. I guess they had the lobes for business or something since they predicted that terrorism and counter-terrorism will be big business in the years to follow.


What They Do

Here’s a bit more on what they do:

“Crisis Solutions specialises in getting organisations crisis ready: we set about this by running crisis simulation exercises and crisis workshops.”

“We plan and deploy crisis simulation exercises that feel REAL.”

They have also developed a “secure exercise web portal” called Crisis Cloud: “This includes simulated news videos, news stores [sic] that are updated as the exercise progresses, together with social media activity and interactive web pages where you can post internal and external statements.”

They make crisis exercises that are believable, and they have a computer program, Crisis Cloud, that I suppose mimicks real media and social media in reporting on the development of the situation. Now what I’m thinking is whether sometimes, or all times, this simulated media environment is actually connected to the real world? In other words, simulated terrorist attacks are reported in simulated media, but are shown to the public as if it was real. That is a possibility.

Another section “CRISIS CLOUD – YOUR SCENARIO, OUR REALISM” states the following:

“Crisis Cloud is tailored to your specific exercise requirements, but a typical example will include:

  • News stories based on the scenario. Stories are updated as the crisis exercise progresses
  • News videos to bring the immediacy of media scrutiny
  • Client pages for internal and external statements
  • A Twitter inspired social media page that is accessible to players and updated in real time”

They admit they make fake news based on their fake scenarios. They also have fake social media accounts doing this. The question then, once again is, do they pass off these fake stories to the general public as real news, or are they truly confined to the people involved with the simulation?


“Fighting” Terrorism

There’s a “Current Threats” section on the website. One of the pages is about terrorism. It says the following:

“Britain is currently on its second highest alert level of ‘severe’, as a terrorist attack is considered highly likely. This is hardly surprising given the recent devastating terrorist attacks on mainland Europe.

On 7th January 2015 two armed men forced their way into the Paris offices of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo where they killed 12 and injured 11 others.

Then on the 13th November 2015 Paris was subjected to a series of coordinated terrorist attacks with suicide bomb outside the Stade de France, several shootings, and a suicide bombing, at cafés and restaurants, and the mass shooting at a rock concert in the Bataclan theatre. 130 people were killed; 89 at the Bataclan theatre, and another 368 injured.

On the morning of 22 March 2016, three coordinated suicide bombings occurred in Belgium, killing 32 members of the public and three terrorists, and injuring more than 300.”

It appears as if it was written back in 2016, or possibly early 2017, since it mentions terror attacks in France and Belgium, but merely suggests at the possibility of such attacks in Britain. The people who wrote this must be Nostradamus, since they guessed correctly that there will be terror attacks in Britain. Or alternatively, I’m wondering if this is an indirect way of admitting/bragging that Crisis Solutions orchestrated these attacks/simulations/hoaxes, and the reference to Britain being on high security alert is an advert that they will strike there next?

There’s one section on the website saying how social media is an important part of crisis management: “Social media is the perfect platform to disseminate messages to as wide an audience as possible.”

They also says that “Social media, digital media, the new media, call it what you will, has the unique ability to break and make stories.” Clearly this company is interested in creating believable stories, i.e. and not so interested in helping security services strengthen themselves to prevent further crises.


What I think about it

There’s probably more interesting tidbits on the website to go into, but I want to discuss the implications of this website. Is it real, a red herring, or a hoax? At least I’m pretty sure it’s not just a hoax by a troll. The company seems real, the LinkedIn account of the manager seems real, and I found their webpage back in Wayback Machine going back to 2001. The website appears to have existed over 15 years.

Then again, when you look at the website it seems a bit too obvious that Crisis Solutions is all about managing false flags and crisis actors. This might be some sort of red herring to direct conspiracy researchers away from the truth. For all I know the website was made a month ago, and all of the alleged history of the company, including the Wayback Machine snapshots and LinkedIn profile have been faked. People who are capable to managing false flags and hoaxes across the world would surely be capable of faking the history of such a company.

But maybe it is real. If Crisis Solutions is behind manufactoring false flags, then maybe the globalist conspirators behind it don’t really care should a handful of conspiracy nuts know about it. After all, what can we do about it? That’s the heart of the question: what can we do with this information? Crisis Solutions exists, can we somehow prove it has orchestrated false flags in the past? Can we somehow force the police to investigate the company? Can we expose them somehow? I don’t know if there is anything we can do, but maybe someone else has a better idea.



Ole Dammegard with SGT: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNntN-RbAfw

Crisis Solutions: http://www.crisis-solutions.com

Richard Whitby LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/richard-whitby-185322b/?ppe=1

Crisis Solutions on Wayback Machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20170601000000*/http://www.crisis-solutions.com

The Progressive Left isn’t the sole Culprit in the Downfall of the West

Nowadays it’s very popular to blame the Progressive Left, Social Justice Warriors, or Marxists for our problems. And to a certain extent we should, since they have created many of our problems or allowed troublemakers to enter our countries. However, that’s not the whole story.

The Right, whether it’s the Alt-Right, New Right or just the Right, likes to emphasize the role of the Left in the European Immigration Crisis, for example, yet it wasn’t created by the Left but by the Right. Remember something that happened 15 years ago, an event called 9/11? After that the United States, along with the Coalition of the Willing, invaded Afghanistan and Iraq. He bombed Pakistan and Yemen as well. Obama simply continued Bush’s policies in the Middle-East. In fact, he has bombed twice as many countries as Bush did, most notably Libya and Syria. The US has supported the “moderate rebels”, i.e. ISIS, in Syria which is the main excuse for the Immigration Crisis. However, not all of the refugees are from Syria.

Let’s take a look at this chart from BBC. It notes the top 10 countries in 2015 from which people applied for asylum in the EU.


While I’m not saying that chart is completely accurate, and things may be different in 2016, it still gives a rough picture of what is going on. Syria is the top country for asylum seekers understandably, but numbers 2 and 3 are Afghanistan and Iraq, countries that Bush invaded. In fact, every country in the list have been attacked by the US in the last 20 years, except maybe Eritrea, Nigeria and Iran (and I don’t want to check right now).

Bill Clinton bombed Kosovo and Albania in the 90s. Both Bush and Obama have bombed Pakistan. The US has meddled with the internal affairs of Ukraine creating a civil war of sorts. The United States is the one that has created the Immigration Crisis in Europe, not the Progressive Left. Both political parties, the Democrats and Republicans, have contributed to the situation. It is wrong to blame only one side of the political spectrum for it.

It is true that the Leftists in Europe have opened doors for countless invaders, but these invaders would have no excuse call themselves refugees hadn’t the Right-winger Bush started World War III in the Middle-East. The existence of the Left-Right dichotomy in politics is a joke and a distraction at your expense. I had thought that people had gotten wise to it years ago, but apparently that is not the case as is evidenced by the rise of the Alt-Right. People still prefer to play this game with two competing teams simply for the pleasure of beating the opponent and gloating over it, instead of actually fixing problems. As if Trump was any better than Hillary. As if the far Right is any better than the far Left.

The eagle has two wings, both are working against you. The right one is acting all tough and causing trouble. Once you get tired of it, the left one blames you for the destruction caused by the right one, and tells you to repent and open your doors to parasites. Now everyone is getting fed up with the parasites, so they want the right one back. Apparently the West has not learned this lesson in 2016.



Obama Has Bombed Twice as Many Countries as Bush: https://alibertarianfuture.com/big-government/war-big-government/obama-bombed-twice-many-countries-bush/

Migrant crisis: Migration to Europe explained in seven charts: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34131911

We Chose This

It’s pointless for the Western man to complain about the predicament we are facing as we all agreed to go along with it. Or our parents did, or our grandparents fought to bring it all about. Or maybe they fought against it, but it yielded little results. The point is, we chose this.

Decades ago many different people pointed out that society is ruled by people with their own values and agendas. They don’t think like us, their goals are not like us, but they were ignored for the most part. Whether it’s Jordan Maxwell, Eustace Mullins, Ezra Pound, David Icke, David Duke, William Cooper, Freeman Fly or even Alex Jones, they’ve been pointing this out way before 9/11. Yet they’ve been laughed off as crazy conspiracy theorists and ignored. Conspiracy theories about the Illuminati and Freemasons have been around for centuries, yet people have decided to ignore them at their own peril. Clearly people are too dumb to even to tend to their rational self-interest.

Sure, the details of all of presented by various researchers differ from Jews, shapeshifting reptilians, Freemasons, Jesuits and Satanists to the Illuminati, but these details do not matter as much as the fact that our world is ruled by people who see the world very differently from us, and are working toward their eldritch goals. This is the underlying point, which the world has chosen to ignore, at its peril.

Therefore it should not come as a surprise if the “elites” decide to send hordes of violent Muslims to our countries as well as a load emasculating propaganda for men and de-feminizing programming for the women. Especially since the majority is willing to eat it all up. Next week they may come up with some sort of bio-weapon to kill thousands of people, or perhaps a fake alien invasion. Who knows? But the point is; we are their property, we know it yet we’ve gone along with it at least for decades. We’ve already given our permission for all of it.

You can call me lazy, but I prefer to fix a problem before it gets out of hand, and avoid both extra work and suffering. This is not, however, how humanity tends to do things. People prefer to ignore problems until it’s at their front door, when it’s usually too late. If people would’ve reacted September 11th, 1991, when George Bush senior gave his New World Order speech, maybe things would be different now. If people wouldn’t have gone along with all of the wars sparked by September 11th of 2001, maybe things would be different. Yet, if that were the case, people of European descent wouldn’t have their heroic battle of Ragnarok  or Armageddon against the Muslim hordes. That’s just way cooler than fixing problems when they arise, raising a family and having a nice, peaceful society.

What I see nowadays is even the alternative media and conspiracy research degrade into Right-Wing (which is still better than Left-Wing) rhetoric against Muslims immigration while downplaying the role that the West, along with the elites ruling it, had with starting the wars in the Middle-East that cause Arabs to be displaced to begin with. I see this rhetoric of the superior Aryan, White man, whereas the reality seems to be that people of European descent excel in creating toys and trinkets by their engineering skills and their morality is expressed in a game of ice hockey or football; my team is righteous because its my team, your team is wicked because it’s not mine. (That is not to say that any other race is superior in this sense, but certainly White people seem to have the least common sense.) All the White man can do to fix things is either hope Trump does it for them, or Hitler comes back from the dead to save them.

I have little faith in any political movement to make things better. Either they’re born a failure, they’re a scam made by opportunistic people or they’re infiltrated and ruined by agents. All I can do is play Captain Hindsight, and point out things that should have been done differently when I was younger.

However, I don’t want to sound too pessimistic, I am merely pointing out my observations. While I don’t believe in any collectivistic solution to our predicament, which is that society is ruled and directed by secret societies whose agendas we do not completely comprehend, I don’t wish to encourage anyone to lose hope or take on any addiction to engage in escapism. The world we live in is highly Satanic or wicked. One important thing is to hold onto your decency. Do not allow the world to corrupt you, even if the world itself is corrupt. Trying to understand why the world so corrupt is also a worthwhile effort, in my opinion. And although I don’t think that one individual can do much to change the course the world is taking, I do think that an individual can help other individuals. This is something worthwhile.

The timeless words of the Youtuber Common Filth have been going around in my head: “Do not put your faith in man.” Man made institutions and ideologies will fail you one way or another. Maybe there is a God, and maybe he cares enough to fix things for those who are not happy with the world. Even if there is no God, having dignity is the most valuable currency when the world ends with a whimper.

Pathological Narcissism or Altruistic Narcissism?

The term Pathological Altruism has been around for at least a few years to describe how people, particularly of European descent, get suckered in to do harm to themselves with the pretense of doing something morally laudable. While I do find the term fairly accurate in explaining the mindset of the West, yet there is a hint of one underlying attribute that I do not agree with; Westerners are so caring that it gets them in trouble. This may not apply to everyone who uses the term Pathological Altruism, but I have heard at least some people use in this manner. As if Europeans are more friendly than say Middle-Easterners and they’re abusing our good nature. Ultimately I do not think that is the case.

I propose the term Pathological Narcissism instead to be at the root of our so-called altruism. It refers to the delusion that a Pathological Narcissist believes the world functions exactly as they think, compared to a normal person who of course has their own beliefs on things, but is capable of assessing information and changing their minds based on new evidence.

One evidence of this phenomenon I’ve been particularly annoyed with for years is the delusional way people put their faith in politicians. Although the fruits of the labour of pretty much every major politician in recent decades has been poverty, war and injustice, the people still think the politician is trying their best to make things work, since that is what they would do in the situation. They cannot fathom that the values and world-view of these politicians differ greatly from that of the average hard-working man and woman. That’s why so many are unwilling to come to terms with the fact that the people in their governments often despise their subjects and actively seek to harm them. Look at the US government participating in 9/11 to kill thousands of their own citizens and countless more in the Middle-East. Look at the German politicians who welcome third-world immigration with the explicit purpose of exterminating their own people. Yet most people are unwilling to come to terms with the fact that their governments are run by evil and sadistic people, since Joe Average himself would never conceive of doing anything as morally reprehensible as politicians do every day.

The root of this psychological problem is not that the people are so kind and compassionate, but that they are narcissistic. They think the world revolves around them, and other people behave according to the same parameters as they do.

Take a look at the White Man’s burden from the 19th century to educate the “savages”. Supposedly Europeans knew better how other people should live. Look at modern Europe being invaded by hordes of Muslim immigrants who commit crimes every day. Yet Joe Average shuts his mind from it, since apparently non-Europeans are still the “noble savage” and not responsible for their actions. They somehow incapable of true malice, since they are not truly sentient beings, and the crimes they commit are due to our bigotry. This insanity is the result of our own narcissism, a very twisted form of masochistic narcissism, but narcissism nonetheless. Or this the far left view on the matter in Current Year.

The far right view, currently a minority but it is growing, is that Whites are somehow incapable of sin, and it is because of the influence of these other races, mainly Jews, Africans and Arabs, that things are going to hell in a handbasket. While the inordinate control over the media, finance and many other avenues by Jews, and the crimes committed by “refugees” from MENA countries, are a legitimate concern, we should ask ourselves why is this happening? Why didn’t we stop the disaster before it got out of hand? However, Whites being a victim supposedly gives us a moral upper hand. We can focus on blaming others for screwing up our own societies, and ignore our own culpability.

Both the far right and left are wallowing in their self-righteousness. Leftists sacrifice themselves for the good of others, whereas the right finds justification for anything as long as it’s in the name of their race. However, the leftists ultimately care only about euphoria they get by their facetiously charitable actions regardless of what the end result is. And the right-wing is happy to defend the West from a Muslim invasion, yet they ignore how we created the whole situation in the first place. Both parties derive narcissistic satisfaction from their struggle.

Wikipedia says: “Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is a personality disorder in which a person is excessively preoccupied with personal adequacy, power, prestige and vanity, mentally unable to see the destructive damage they are causing to themselves and often others.” I think this describes the Western mindset pretty well. It does not just apply to greedy corporate CEOs or hedonistic socialites, but especially to our sense of morality. As long as I feel I’m doing the right thing, I’m doing the right thing. No matter the consequences. The West has poured billions of dollars into monetary aid into Africa, but has it actually accomplished anything there? As far as I know, many places of Africa are starving and they’re suffering from AIDS and war. Yet we just feel morally so good giving them money, it doesn’t matter if our efforts actually yield any results. It’s like of a man has only one arm and you want to help him, but you cannot grow him a new arm, so you cut your arm off as well.

Now that I think of it, maybe Altruistic Narcissism would be a better description for this phenomenon than Pathological Narcissism? Whatever it is at the root of our Pathological Altruism lies deep-rooted narcissism.


P.S. If you think Trump is going to fix things, you’re wallowing in narcissistic delusion and projecting attributes onto him that he does not possess.



Narcissistic personality disorder: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder


Rocking MrE Bravely Blocked me

Rocking MrE is a libertarian youtuber who discusses many social issues of today. I’ve watched dozens of his videos over the last few years and I generally agree with them, and I’ve thought he’s a decent guy. A couple of days ago he posted a video titled Recurring German Totalitarianism, which changed my view of him, especially after the treatment I got from him when I responded to his video.

In the video Rocking MrE highlights what he sees as “recurring German totalitarianism”, which has had a negative effect on the world ever since the Germanic Goths raided ancient Rome and started the Holy Roman Empire. He continues onto Martin Luther’s reformation of Christianity, birth of Communism, onto the Nazis and finally into modern day with Angela Merkel. Rocking MrE asks “why Germans were ever allowed to have a national identity again after causing two World Wars?” His solution to the German problem that they “want to dominate others” is not to allow “Germany exist as a nation in any capacity ever again”.

I found Rocking MrE’s claims that German culture is somehow inherently totalitarian outrageous, and his solution is to apparently genocide Germans, or at least massacre them into submission, even more alarming. What else could it mean that he does not want the Germans to exist as a nation ever again other than genocide, or somehow suppress and humiliate the German psyche so that they are mentally and spiritually genocided?

I posted the following comment on his video to address my concerns:

“I usually like your videos, but this time I very much disagree with what you are saying. First of all, I think in WWII the Axis was the lesser of two evils. And if we’re talking about the evil that European nations have inflicted on the world, Great Britain wins the prize. In the Victorian era the British empire dominated half of the world through violence and other underhanded methods. Britain was influential in promoting Zionism and creating the state of Israel. The reason why Germany today is acting totalitarian and telling other European nations what to do is that it’s not the Germans who are in control of their own country, but globalist, US and Zionist -forces. It’s the Zionists who are setting up Germany to be the bad guy, the same as they did in the 1930s, and you seem to believe them.”

MrE ignored my comment. This is fair enough. I don’t mind if someone ignores a comment on the internet. It is a normal occurrence.

I read more of the comments on the video and saw this:


I regarded Rocking MrE’s reasoning for the evil of Germany as an alarmingly Cultural Marxist way of thinking and commented on it. A brief discussion ensued:


As you can see Rocking MrE blocked me and therefore I cannot respond to him on Youtube so I have to do it here. I would have accepted if he had said that he does not wish to argue with me, or that we can agree to disagree, but instead he blocked and calls me “pathetically dishonest” and uses other disparaging remarks, and on top of it he blocked me. I not only take it personally, but view it as evidence that Rocking MrE himself does not have much faith in his claims, and therefore wishes to censor people who disagree with him.

My response to MrE’s final comment is as follows. I did not say he was a Cultural Marxist for opposing the German leftist agenda. I did not say he was a Cultural Marxist at all. I merely commented that his reasoning sounds like it, and I was sort of curious and perplexed by why he would act like Cultural Marxists do. The real issue is not however whether or not the moniker Cultural Marxist is applicable here or not, but that Rocking MrE seems to be advocating war on Germany, because their culture is somehow irreparably wrong. Is he suggesting that other European nations should attack Germany to destroy it? Cause a civil war in the European Union? Don’t you think Europe has enough problems already? Or if he is not talking about literal war against Germany, what is he talking about when he says we shouldn’t allow Germany to “exist as a nation in any capacity ever again”?

You cannot prove that a culture that is thousands of years old is inherently “regressive” with a 10-minute video. This is simply a silly statement. You can take a few negative facts about any culture, downplay the mundane and the good parts, and the culture seems despicable. Maybe I’m just ignorant, but I cannot make a moral judgement on the Goths sacking Rome. It’s just an historical event. I cannot say that the Romans were good and the Goths bad or regressive, or vice versa.

Perhaps I am once again ignorant, but I do not see the connection between Goths sacking Rome over a 1,500 years ago and Angela Merkel’s leftist policies today. Were the Goths the first leftists or something? I hate her policies almost as much Rocking MrE does, but not apparently as much as he does, since his hatred of German culture seems to amplify it. The problem in Germany is that the Germans don’t really control their own country. Instead the United States and Israel, at least, have too much influence over Germany. Many Germans hate Merkel too. I don’t think they’re the exception, the few good non-totalitarian Germans.

Germany was the victim in both world wars. Not the instigator. In the first war it was betrayed by its leftist politicians, and other European nations descended on it like hyenas. Britain started the second world war, not Germany. A document which contains an early draft of the British king’s speech was discovered last year, and it heavily suggests Britain wanted to declare war on Germany before it invaded Poland. It was dated 7 days before the Polish invasion. Germany has been falsely demonized ever since the end of the war. I have written a few posts on this, and alternative media sites such as Red Ice Creations have made many programs on this.

The Frankfurt School, the originators of Cultural Marxism, came from Germany, true. However, they were not appreciated in Germany, and they fled to America. Moreover most of them were Jews. They weren’t exactly the regular beer and lederhosen -representatives of German culture. Same goes for Karl Marx.

Once again I must reiterate that my beef with Rocking MrE is that he seems to be advocating destruction or the genocide of Germans. This is actual Hate Speech. It’s a Marxist term which I despise, but unlike Marxists, I don’t want to see Hate Speech banned. I’m happy to see people expose their true colours. Despite his protests Rocking MrE seems to be advocating the same thing as Cultural Marxists do: destruction of European people, or at least our culture. The difference is MrE has so far announced he wishes to destroy only German culture.

Rocking MrE has added a notification to the start of his video that armies of David Duke have trolled him. I can understand if he is edgy and wants to block people he views as trolls, if many trolls have attacked him because of the video. However, somehow I don’t think David Duke has “armies” or that he would be sending them to attack a youtuber for making a video. I see it as more likely that people were calling MrE out for his insane anti-German rantings.



I didn’t call Britain the most evil nation in Europe because Rocking MrE is British, but because I think Britain’s actions speak for themselves. I also do not blame British culture, but the political establishment. I kind of like both British and German culture.



Recurring German Totalitarianism: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j25oBrf1mwo

Document Confirms British were Plotting to Invade Germany Before Germany Invaded Poland: http://www.redicecreations.com/article.php?id=31573

Migrant Propaganda on the streets in Finland

In recent months I’ve seen some ads on the street here in Finland that promote multiculturalism, multi-racialism, or as it is nowadays known, cultural cuckoldry. Some of the ads are just regular grocery store stuff, while others are more “humanitarian”. I don’t have photos of all of the pictures I’ve seem, but I’ll post the few I’ve taken pictures of.

This one shows a middle-eastern man. The caption says something like: “He is present/here. You decide if he can help.” To be quite honest, I don’t know what it means, but the advertisement is from the Red Cross, so they’re probably asking for money as usual.



Just yesterday I saw this spinning advertisement stand with three pictures of black people.




The caption Tulossa Suomeen means “Coming to Finland”. There is a clear double entendre here. The obvious meaning is that they’re saying this new fashion brand, or whatever it is they’re marketing, is coming to Finland. But the insidious message is that also truckloads and boatloads of people like them are coming to Finland.

I don’t think these ads, and some others I’ve seen, are innocent marketing of consumer products (I don’t think marketing of consumer products is ever innocent either), but psychological conditioning trying to make us accept these armies of people from foreign races and cultures into our country without resistance. It’s sort of like when the United States attacked Iraq, they dropped flyers on the population explaining that they should just surrender and that Americans are the good guys. These ads are a disgusting display of manipulation and cuckoldry.

I also saw posters like this in the city center, probably plastered by leftist turncoats:


I shouldn’t have to point this out, but I don’t hate Africans, Middle-Easterners, or Muslims, but I hate this whole situation of them being forced into my country. It is an invasion that the High Command in the European Union, and the governments of most European nations are willingly participating in. It is a natural reaction to feel anger, aversion, and hate when something you don’t want is forced onto you.

If I invite friends to my apartment, I happily open my door for them. I am not happy when someone enters my apartment without my permission. It is natural to feel hate in such a situation. You should do the same.