russia-insider--2020-10-17--The West Resembles a Decapitated Rooster, Wings Still Flapping, Barely Flying

`` Democratic elections are but a recent innovation , and a most uncertain one .
For instance , during the 2016 election in the US , the establishment trotted out an entire array of craven , feckless , corrupt opportunists , and Trump knocked them all out with a feather ... '' This article from our archives was first published on RI in November 2018 Orlov is one of our favorite essayists on Russia and all sorts of other things .
He moved to the US as a child , and lives in the Boston area .
He is one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has dubbed 'The Dystopians ' in an excellent 2009 profile , along with James Howard Kunstler , another regular contributor to RI ( archive ) .
These theorists believe that modern society is headed for a jarring and painful crack-up .
He is best known for his 2011 book comparing Soviet and American collapse ( he thinks America 's will be worse ) .
He is a prolific author on a wide array of subjects , and you can see his work by searching him on Amazon .
He has a large following @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and we urge you to support him there , as Russia Insider does .
His current project is organizing the production of affordable house boats for living on .
He lives on a boat himself .
If you have n't discovered his work yet , please take a look at his archive of articles on RI .
They are a real treasure , full of invaluable insight into both the US and Russia and how they are related .
When I was five and spending the summer in a small village a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I witnessed the execution of a rooster .
My brother and I walked over to a neighbor ’ s house to pick up some eggs .
Just as we arrived the neighbor finally caught the rooster and chopped his head of .
The now headless rooster then put on quite an aerobatic performance that was quite amazing .
After doing an unlimited takeoff he repeatedly soared and plummeted , executed several touch-and-gos ( more like crash-and-goes , actually ) and was undeterred by what previously would have been head-on collisions .
I was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aerodynamic qualities of barnyard fowl and was duly impressed with the energetic and breathtakingly erratic behavior of a bird liberated from the mental straitjacket of its brain .
Unfortunately , the performance only lasted for a minute or so .
A word to the wise : I later learned that it is possible to prolong the show , should the need ever arise , by heating up the hatchet so as to cauterize the severed neck .
More recently , I have learned that such sans-têteaerobatics are not restricted to chickens .
Figurative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can exhibit something similar .
A prime example is the greatest boondoggle in the history of military aviation , the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter .
It too is liable to losing its head , in the sense of the pilot blacking out .
In addition to being ridiculously expensive ( over $ 1.5 trillion in projected project costs ) and plagued with problems ( only half of the built planes are considered ready for any sort of mission and there are over a thousand known defects that haven ’ t been fixed , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ air-to-air combat or ground support ) F-35 pilots often report feeling sick and there have been many incidents where they lost consciousness , probably due to oxygen starvation and circulation problems .
In response , the fatally flawed jet ’ s maker Lockheed Martin , whose motto seems to be “ One boondoggle deserves another , ” has decided to add a subsystem .
Called Auto-GCAS ( for Ground Collision Avoidance System ) , it takes over automatically if it detects the danger of ground collision and the pilot fails to respond to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Auto-GCAS then throttles up and directs the plane upward , pulling a maximum of five g ’ s .
What does that do to a pilot who is already feeling sick or is unconscious ?
Once a safe altitude is reached , the plane levels out and Auto-GCAS shuts off .
If the pilot happens to be offline for good , the process repeats until the plane runs out of fuel and crashes .
I hope that you are impressed with the sheer brilliance of the plan .
A show designed to impress @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Utah , where 35 F-35s took off , one right after the other .
It has not been independently verified how many of them landed .
Auto-GCAS is slated to be ready for use by 2024 , but Pentagon ’ s planners are hoping to accelerate the process .
All of this made me wonder about the general behavior to be expected of hierarchically organized , centrally controlled systems once they are deprived of their control module .
Auto-GCAS is by no means the worst case .
For instance , there is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hand .
If it detects that the Russian military leadership has been incapacitated by a nuclear strike , it will launch an all-out nuclear attack , obliterating the aggressor .
This may seem like a really bad plan , but then attacking Russia is a really bad plan too , and one bad plan deserves another .
Figurative birds , of the mechanical variety , can exhibit something similar .
A prime example is the greatest boondoggle in the history of military aviation , the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter .
It too is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the sense of the pilot blacking out .
In addition to being ridiculously expensive ( over $ 1.5 trillion in projected project costs ) and plagued with problems ( only half of the built planes are considered ready for any sort of mission and there are over a thousand known defects that haven ’ t been fixed , including ones that make it useless for air-to-air combat or ground support ) F-35 pilots often report feeling sick and there have been many incidents where they lost consciousness , probably due to oxygen starvation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flawed jet ’ s maker Lockheed Martin , whose motto seems to be “ One boondoggle deserves another , ” has decided to add a subsystem .
Called Auto-GCAS ( for Ground Collision Avoidance System ) , it takes over automatically if it detects the danger of ground collision and the pilot fails to respond to the alarm and take corrective action .
Auto-GCAS then throttles up and directs the plane upward , pulling a maximum of five g ’ s .
What does that do to a pilot who is already feeling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safe altitude is reached , the plane levels out and Auto-GCAS shuts off .
If the pilot happens to be offline for good , the process repeats until the plane runs out of fuel and crashes .
I hope that you are impressed with the sheer brilliance of the plan .
A show designed to impress was recently staged at an airfield in Utah , where 35 F-35s took off , one right after the other .
It has not been independently verified how many of them landed .
Auto-GCAS is slated to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but Pentagon ’ s planners are hoping to accelerate the process.All of this made me wonder about the general behavior to be expected of hierarchically organized , centrally controlled systems once they are deprived of their control module .
Auto-GCAS is by no means the worst case .
For instance , there is the Russian Perimetr system , a.k.a .
Dead Hand .
If it detects that the Russian military leadership has been incapacitated by a nuclear strike , it will launch an all-out nuclear attack , obliterating the aggressor .
This may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but then attacking Russia is a really bad plan too , and one bad plan deserves another .
What makes this plan bad is that it doesn ’ t elicit the right response .
The right response is : “ Oh , we see , attacking Russia is sheer suicide , so let ’ s not do that.
” But where ’ s the money in not planning to attack Russia ?
And so instead the “ One boondoggle deserves another ” crew sets forth to build anti-ballistic missile systems ( which don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bomb shelters stocked with years ’ worth of supplies ( which is gold-plating ; a large shallow grave to jump into when the time comes would work just as well ) .
And yet as far as planning for decapitation goes , Dead Hand is state of the art .
Most other large-scale centrally controlled systems are woefully unprepared for the loss of their command modules .
For instance , look at finance .
After the financial collapse of 2008 it quickly became obvious that nobody competent or responsible was in charge .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ banks to start blowing financial bubbles by zeroing out interest rates and flooding the world with new debt .
Debt that expands much faster than the economy is garbage debt , and it gave rise to various other kinds of garbage : garbage energy from shale and tar sands , garbage money in the form of cryptocurrencies , garbage real estate investment schemes , garbage corporate balance sheets bloated with debt used up in stock buybacks , a large crop of garbage oligarchs gorging themselves on all of this garbage “ wealth ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ while all this garbage is packaged up in financial bubbles , but once they pop ( and as all children know all bubbles pop eventually ) everyone will end up wearing the garbage .
There are plenty of examples of political auto-decapitation as well .
In the US , Trump realized that he can become president simply by insulting all of his competitors ( who richly deserved such treatment ) and so he did .
But now the hive mind of Washington is deeply at odds with the bumblebee-mind of Trump , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ head , except perhaps in a strictly symbolic sense .
Things are no better in Europe .
In the UK , an anti-Brexit team is in charge of negotiating Brexit , struggling to make it as anti-Brexit a Brexit as possible .
That doesn ’ t seem like any sort of “ headedness.
” In Germany , Merkel is on her way out , and her replacement has the unenviable task of hammering together a governing coalition out of parties that are too busy knocking heads with each other .
The multi-headed bureaucratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with anyone .
What is the recourse ?
Emperor Macron of France , perhaps ?
Is Europe ready to be headed by a diacritical character ?
( A macron is a horizontal line you place over vowel letters to represent a long vowel : Mācron . )
There are systems that are properly headless : flocks of birds , schools of fish , communes of anarchists , etc .
They are anarchically structured and individuals within them take on temporary , task-based leadership roles as the situation demands and can only expect to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in executing the tasks .
But most of the human systems we have are hierarchically structured and require to be headed by someone .
Democratic elections are but a recent innovation , and a most uncertain one .
For instance , during the 2016 election in the US , the establishment trotted out an entire array of craven , feckless , corrupt opportunists , and Trump knocked them all out with a feather , not because he is any sort of proper leader , but because it was so easy .
For an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , look at today ’ s Ukraine—the most recent experiment in Western democracy .
There , a constitutionally elected , though remarkably corrupt and indecisive president was violently overthrown in 2014 in a US-managed coup and replaced with an American puppet so unpopular that yesterday he was forced to introduce martial law—just in order to be able to cancel the elections scheduled in three months and to remain in office de facto .
To produce a rationale for declaring martial law he sent some small boats on a truly idiotic mission .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ zone in the Black Sea , refused to respond when hailed and then pointed weapons at Russian border patrol .
For this they were duly arrested and hauled off to jail , and their boats confiscated .
Previously , an ongoing civil war instigated by this same president resulted in some fifty thousand casualties , but no martial law was ever deemed necessary .
What ’ s different now ?
Oh , the elections , of course !
If these are the fruits of democracy , perhaps the Ukrainians should consider going back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worked much better and for much longer periods of time .
For instance , at the time of its annexation by Russia in 1783 , Crimea was ruled by Shahin Girei , a descendant of Genghis Khan who was born around 1155 .
That one dynasty , spanning 628 years , ruled the largest empire that ever was .
At one point it included all of China , most of Russia , Korea , Persia and India , plus many lands in between .
Genghis had decreed that no part of the Mongol @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wasn ’ t a direct descendant of his , and so it was .
The Mongol Empire ended peacefully , with Shahin Girei abdicating his throne and accepting protection from Catherine the Great .
Maybe that ’ s the plan , then : install a Ukrainian Emperor and immediately have him abdicate his throne and accept protection from Putin the Great .
Then Putin will turn the heat and the hot water back on , the armed thugs will be marched off to someplace safe for disarming and de-thugging , and the nuke @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we seem to be headed ( no pun intended ) for unstable and disrupted times , it bears pointing out that while democracy may be very nice when everything is going along according to plan , it is not particularly resilient in the face of severe disruption .
And what is the plan now—in the US , or in the EU ( or what will be left of it ) ?
We have some truly ghastly examples of the fruits of democracy in the form of the Weimar Republic in Germany or the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1917 in Russia .
If you don ’ t fancy being ruled by headless chickens , consider picking a leader using whatever ad hoc procedure that works .
The idea is to avoid any more Robespierrian Reigns of Terror , Reichstag fires or October Revolutions—because we already know what those are like .

"Democratic elections are but a recent innovation, and a most uncertain one. For instance, during the 2016 election in the US, the establishment trotted out an entire array of craven, feckless, corrupt opportunists, and Trump knocked them all out with a feather ..."
This article from our archives was first published on RI in November 2018
Orlov is one of our favorite essayists on Russia and all sorts of other things. He moved to the US as a child, and lives in the Boston area.
He is one of the better-known thinkers The New Yorker has dubbed 'The Dystopians' in an excellent 2009 profile, along with James Howard Kunstler, another regular contributor to RI (archive). These theorists believe that modern society is headed for a jarring and painful crack-up.
He is best known for his 2011 book comparing Soviet and American collapse (he thinks America's will be worse). He is a prolific author on a wide array of subjects, and you can see his work by searching him on Amazon.
He has a large following on the web, and on Patreon, and we urge you to support him there, as Russia Insider does.
His current project is organizing the production of affordable house boats for living on. He lives on a boat himself.
If you haven't discovered his work yet, please take a look at his archive of articles on RI. They are a real treasure, full of invaluable insight into both the US and Russia and how they are related.
When I was five and spending the summer in a small village a couple of time zones east of Moscow I witnessed the execution of a rooster. My brother and I walked over to a neighbor’s house to pick up some eggs. Just as we arrived the neighbor finally caught the rooster and chopped his head of.
The now headless rooster then put on quite an aerobatic performance that was quite amazing. After doing an unlimited takeoff he repeatedly soared and plummeted, executed several touch-and-gos (more like crash-and-goes, actually) and was undeterred by what previously would have been head-on collisions. I was by then quite familiar with the poor aerodynamic qualities of barnyard fowl and was duly impressed with the energetic and breathtakingly erratic behavior of a bird liberated from the mental straitjacket of its brain. Unfortunately, the performance only lasted for a minute or so. A word to the wise: I later learned that it is possible to prolong the show, should the need ever arise, by heating up the hatchet so as to cauterize the severed neck. More recently, I have learned that such sans-têteaerobatics are not restricted to chickens.
Figurative birds, of the mechanical variety, can exhibit something similar. A prime example is the greatest boondoggle in the history of military aviation, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. It too is liable to losing its head, in the sense of the pilot blacking out. In addition to being ridiculously expensive (over $1.5 trillion in projected project costs) and plagued with problems (only half of the built planes are considered ready for any sort of mission and there are over a thousand known defects that haven’t been fixed, including ones that make it useless for air-to-air combat or ground support) F-35 pilots often report feeling sick and there have been many incidents where they lost consciousness, probably due to oxygen starvation and circulation problems.
In response, the fatally flawed jet’s maker Lockheed Martin, whose motto seems to be “One boondoggle deserves another,” has decided to add a subsystem. Called Auto-GCAS (for Ground Collision Avoidance System), it takes over automatically if it detects the danger of ground collision and the pilot fails to respond to the alarm and take corrective action. Auto-GCAS then throttles up and directs the plane upward, pulling a maximum of five g’s. What does that do to a pilot who is already feeling sick or is unconscious? Once a safe altitude is reached, the plane levels out and Auto-GCAS shuts off. If the pilot happens to be offline for good, the process repeats until the plane runs out of fuel and crashes. I hope that you are impressed with the sheer brilliance of the plan. A show designed to impress was recently staged at an airfield in Utah, where 35 F-35s took off, one right after the other. It has not been independently verified how many of them landed. Auto-GCAS is slated to be ready for use by 2024, but Pentagon’s planners are hoping to accelerate the process.
All of this made me wonder about the general behavior to be expected of hierarchically organized, centrally controlled systems once they are deprived of their control module. Auto-GCAS is by no means the worst case. For instance, there is the Russian Perimetr system, a.k.a. Dead Hand. If it detects that the Russian military leadership has been incapacitated by a nuclear strike, it will launch an all-out nuclear attack, obliterating the aggressor. This may seem like a really bad plan, but then attacking Russia is a really bad plan too, and one bad plan deserves another. Figurative birds, of the mechanical variety, can exhibit something similar. A prime example is the greatest boondoggle in the history of military aviation, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. It too is liable to losing its head, in the sense of the pilot blacking out. In addition to being ridiculously expensive (over $1.5 trillion in projected project costs) and plagued with problems (only half of the built planes are considered ready for any sort of mission and there are over a thousand known defects that haven’t been fixed, including ones that make it useless for air-to-air combat or ground support) F-35 pilots often report feeling sick and there have been many incidents where they lost consciousness, probably due to oxygen starvation and circulation problems.In response, the fatally flawed jet’s maker Lockheed Martin, whose motto seems to be “One boondoggle deserves another,” has decided to add a subsystem. Called Auto-GCAS (for Ground Collision Avoidance System), it takes over automatically if it detects the danger of ground collision and the pilot fails to respond to the alarm and take corrective action. Auto-GCAS then throttles up and directs the plane upward, pulling a maximum of five g’s. What does that do to a pilot who is already feeling sick or is unconscious? Once a safe altitude is reached, the plane levels out and Auto-GCAS shuts off. If the pilot happens to be offline for good, the process repeats until the plane runs out of fuel and crashes. I hope that you are impressed with the sheer brilliance of the plan. A show designed to impress was recently staged at an airfield in Utah, where 35 F-35s took off, one right after the other. It has not been independently verified how many of them landed. Auto-GCAS is slated to be ready for use by 2024, but Pentagon’s planners are hoping to accelerate the process.All of this made me wonder about the general behavior to be expected of hierarchically organized, centrally controlled systems once they are deprived of their control module. Auto-GCAS is by no means the worst case. For instance, there is the Russian Perimetr system, a.k.a. Dead Hand. If it detects that the Russian military leadership has been incapacitated by a nuclear strike, it will launch an all-out nuclear attack, obliterating the aggressor. This may seem like a really bad plan, but then attacking Russia is a really bad plan too, and one bad plan deserves another.
What makes this plan bad is that it doesn’t elicit the right response. The right response is: “Oh, we see, attacking Russia is sheer suicide, so let’s not do that.” But where’s the money in not planning to attack Russia? And so instead the “One boondoggle deserves another” crew sets forth to build anti-ballistic missile systems (which don’t work) and deep underground bomb shelters stocked with years’ worth of supplies (which is gold-plating; a large shallow grave to jump into when the time comes would work just as well).
And yet as far as planning for decapitation goes, Dead Hand is state of the art. Most other large-scale centrally controlled systems are woefully unprepared for the loss of their command modules. For instance, look at finance. After the financial collapse of 2008 it quickly became obvious that nobody competent or responsible was in charge.
The “solution” was for central banks to start blowing financial bubbles by zeroing out interest rates and flooding the world with new debt. Debt that expands much faster than the economy is garbage debt, and it gave rise to various other kinds of garbage: garbage energy from shale and tar sands, garbage money in the form of cryptocurrencies, garbage real estate investment schemes, garbage corporate balance sheets bloated with debt used up in stock buybacks, a large crop of garbage oligarchs gorging themselves on all of this garbage “wealth” and much else. Things look good while all this garbage is packaged up in financial bubbles, but once they pop (and as all children know all bubbles pop eventually) everyone will end up wearing the garbage.
There are plenty of examples of political auto-decapitation as well. In the US, Trump realized that he can become president simply by insulting all of his competitors (who richly deserved such treatment) and so he did. But now the hive mind of Washington is deeply at odds with the bumblebee-mind of Trump, and neither qualifies as any sort of a head, except perhaps in a strictly symbolic sense. Things are no better in Europe. In the UK, an anti-Brexit team is in charge of negotiating Brexit, struggling to make it as anti-Brexit a Brexit as possible.
That doesn’t seem like any sort of “headedness.” In Germany, Merkel is on her way out, and her replacement has the unenviable task of hammering together a governing coalition out of parties that are too busy knocking heads with each other. The multi-headed bureaucratic hydra in Brussels is not exactly popular with anyone. What is the recourse? Emperor Macron of France, perhaps? Is Europe ready to be headed by a diacritical character? (A macron is a horizontal line you place over vowel letters to represent a long vowel: Mācron.)
There are systems that are properly headless: flocks of birds, schools of fish, communes of anarchists, etc. They are anarchically structured and individuals within them take on temporary, task-based leadership roles as the situation demands and can only expect to be obeyed in accordance with their competence in executing the tasks.
But most of the human systems we have are hierarchically structured and require to be headed by someone. Democratic elections are but a recent innovation, and a most uncertain one. For instance, during the 2016 election in the US, the establishment trotted out an entire array of craven, feckless, corrupt opportunists, and Trump knocked them all out with a feather, not because he is any sort of proper leader, but because it was so easy.
For an even more amazing example of democratic failure, look at today’s Ukraine—the most recent experiment in Western democracy. There, a constitutionally elected, though remarkably corrupt and indecisive president was violently overthrown in 2014 in a US-managed coup and replaced with an American puppet so unpopular that yesterday he was forced to introduce martial law—just in order to be able to cancel the elections scheduled in three months and to remain in office de facto.
To produce a rationale for declaring martial law he sent some small boats on a truly idiotic mission. The boats sailed into a Russian-controlled high traffic zone in the Black Sea, refused to respond when hailed and then pointed weapons at Russian border patrol. For this they were duly arrested and hauled off to jail, and their boats confiscated. Previously, an ongoing civil war instigated by this same president resulted in some fifty thousand casualties, but no martial law was ever deemed necessary. What’s different now? Oh, the elections, of course!
If these are the fruits of democracy, perhaps the Ukrainians should consider going back to a monarchy. Dynastic succession has worked much better and for much longer periods of time. For instance, at the time of its annexation by Russia in 1783, Crimea was ruled by Shahin Girei, a descendant of Genghis Khan who was born around 1155.
That one dynasty, spanning 628 years, ruled the largest empire that ever was. At one point it included all of China, most of Russia, Korea, Persia and India, plus many lands in between. Genghis had decreed that no part of the Mongol Empire could be ruled by anyone who wasn’t a direct descendant of his, and so it was.
The Mongol Empire ended peacefully, with Shahin Girei abdicating his throne and accepting protection from Catherine the Great. Maybe that’s the plan, then: install a Ukrainian Emperor and immediately have him abdicate his throne and accept protection from Putin the Great. Then Putin will turn the heat and the hot water back on, the armed thugs will be marched off to someplace safe for disarming and de-thugging, and the nuke plants will stop breaking down.
Since we seem to be headed (no pun intended) for unstable and disrupted times, it bears pointing out that while democracy may be very nice when everything is going along according to plan, it is not particularly resilient in the face of severe disruption. And what is the plan now—in the US, or in the EU (or what will be left of it)?
We have some truly ghastly examples of the fruits of democracy in the form of the Weimar Republic in Germany or the Interim Government between February and October of 1917 in Russia. If you don’t fancy being ruled by headless chickens, consider picking a leader using whatever ad hoc procedure that works.
The idea is to avoid any more Robespierrian Reigns of Terror, Reichstag fires or October Revolutions—because we already know what those are like.


russia-insider--2020-10-18--Inside Nazi Germany: An American Intellectual Finds Order, Reason, Humanity

This article from our archives was first published on RI in April 2019 Today it is impossible to dissent openly from racial orthodoxy without sooner or later being called a “ Nazi.
” Despite ( or perhaps because of ) the stupidity of doing so , egalitarians are quick to equate with Hitler anyone who endorses American racial views that antedate Hitler by centuries .
Most liberals are not so silly as to call Lincoln a Nazi , but if he were to rise from the grave and restate his views from the debates with Douglas that is just one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The idea of a racial nation was National Socialism ’ s point of departure , but from the outset it was a comprehensive theory of applied government designed to funnel the energies of every German into collective goals .
It was similar to Communism in this respect , and similar also in the sweeping institutional changes it imposed .
In its historical period , however , racial policy was not the most striking aspect of Nazism .
In the 1930s , the view that race was an essential element of the nation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Germans—indeed , no more foreign than it is to virtually every non-white living today .
It was hardly the distinctive characteristic of the regime .
What was distinctive ?
What , in fact , did racially aware Americans of the period — people whose ideas would , today , be called “ Nazi ” —think of the Third Reich ?
We have a fascinating answer in Into the Darkness , the last book by one of the most influential American champions of racial consciousness , Lothrop Stoddard .
Stoddard wrote this book—recently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ months in Germany as a reporter during the “ phony war ” of 1939-40 .
A Harvard Ph.D. and foreign affairs specialist , Stoddard was particularly keen on understanding how war and Nazism had changed everyday life in Germany , and his account has a frank , contemporaneous quality untouched by the acrimony that became common after the United States went to war .
Many of Stoddard ’ s strongest impressions were colored as much by war as by the politics of the new regime .
The title , for example , does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ barbarism but to the rigorous blackout all Germans maintained against the possibility of night bombardment by the British .
Darkness was , in fact , Stoddard ’ s first experience of Germany .
Even the train by which he entered from Italy had to douse its lights at the border , and passengers crept about by the light of tiny blue bulbs .
Stoddard couldn ’ t see the slightest glimmer from his train window , not even as he glided through Munich : “ Passing through this great darkened city , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ positively oppressive.
” In Berlin , where he spent most of his four months , headlights of cars were heavily hooded , making it impossible to drive at night at speeds greater than a crawl .
Pedestrians carried pocket flashlights to see where they were going , but were forbidden to shine them upwards to read street signs , since even a flashlight might catch the eye of a British bombardier .
Stoddard hated the blackout , complaining that it had a “ depressing , almost paralyzing effect .
It must be lived @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Stoddard described in detail was the rationing regimen according to which everything including food and clothing was doled out with typically German efficiency .
The government issued everyone—including travelers—monthly food coupons that had to be exchanged even for a restaurant meal .
Coupons restricted quantity , not quality , so the rich ate better than the poor but not more .
Stoddard found that when wealthy friends invited him to restaurants and paid for his meals , he still had to turn over coupons to the waiters because not even the rich had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ goods were rationed the same way , in a system designed to “ assure to the poorest German the basic necessities of life , while the richest can not get much more than his share.
” Stoddard complained bitterly about the poor quality and limited variety of the food—Germans drank roasted barley rather than coffee because of the British naval blockade—but confessed there was enough starch in a German ration for him to put on 12 pounds in four months .
If even the privileged position of a foreign correspondent seemed grim to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he found no enthusiasm for the war : “ The Germans detest this war .
.
.
This attitude is shared by Nazis and non-Nazis .
On this point there is no difference between them.
” He wrote that most Germans never believed France and England would declare war over Poland but that even ardent Nazis were willing to criticize Hitler for taking the risk .
Stoddard noted that memories of “ the Great War ” were still fresh enough to keep any hint of romance or overconfidence out of this one .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ privation : The reason , concluded Stoddard , was that Germans were convinced defeat would mean extinction for Germany , and that even if the war had been a great blunder , it was a crisis of titanic proportions that called for heroism .
And what of Nazism itself ?
What most struck Stoddard was its revolutionary , authoritarian nature .
“ The National Socialist upheaval that has created the Third Reich , ” he wrote “ goes far deeper than the Fascist regime in Italy , and is perhaps a more defiant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Communism of Soviet Russia.
” “ [ I ] ts leaders , ” he added , “ are revolutionists from the ground up.
” Many of the Nazi policies seemed similar to Communism : “ Agriculture has basically been socialized , ” he wrote , adding that the Nazis “ co-ordinated everybody connected with industry into a huge vertical trust.
” He wondered whether Hitler Youth programs and National Labor Service did not turn the lives of young people into one long Nazi summer camp .
He complained about “ the liquidation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but of most of the parochial schools as well.
” He shuddered at the words of Bernhard Rust , Reich Minister of Education : “ All forms of instruction have one aim—the shaping of the National Socialist human.
” ( emphasis in the original ) Stoddard was bemused by Strength Through Joy , or workplace-based leisure : “ This is the most gigantic scheme of organized , state-directed entertainment that the world has ever seen .
It includes a wide variety of activities , from ‘ highbrow ’ art and music to popular @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Germans seemed to enjoy it , but he added that “ to the individualist Anglo-Saxon , all this regimented ‘ leisure to order ’ may not sound particularly attractive.
” By the end of his stay , Stoddard believed he had found the answer to riddles that baffled experts : “ Nazi achievements in finance and industry are generally regarded as deep , dark mysteries abroad .
To me , the answer is very simple : An absolute dictatorship over an industrious , resourceful people.
” ( emphasis in the original ) What @ @ @ @ @ @ @ points out in a useful new introduction to this edition , Stoddard had been cool towards the Nazis from the beginning .
In 1935 he wrote : One of the final passages of Into the Darkness suggests that four months of direct observation did not greatly change his views .
When he finally found himself back among Americans on a steamship bound for home , he was delighted by creature comforts but by something else , too : “ Even more deeply satisfying is the sense that you are among your own kind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ulcerated by nationalistic hatreds.
” Stoddard writes surprisingly little about Jews , perhaps because he had little material : Stoddard spoke good German , had lived in Austria , and generally liked Germans , but was not often impressed by Nazis .
He concluded that polished and capable party members gravitated to Berlin but the provincial leavings were a sorry lot .
He described officials he met in Weimar : Stoddard took an immediate dislike to a Gauleiter he met in Deusseldorf : “ He was a distinctly sinister-looking type ; hard-faced , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crueler mouth .
A sadist , if I ever saw one .
I imagine how unpopular he must be among the good-natured , kindly Duesseldorfers.
” Stoddard managed to interview several top Nazis , including Hitler—who seems to have disappointed him by being insufficiently mesmerizing .
He contrasted the Führer to Mussolini : Of the top Nazis , Goebbels seems to cut the most distinctive figure : “ This lithe , brunet Rhinelander , with his agile mind , cynical humor , and telling gestures , is an excellent person to interview .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ instant , and he is full of what the journalist calls ‘ good lines.
’ ” Stoddard notes the Nazi ’ s accomplishments—resurrection of an inert economy , a clampdown on crime , full employment—but bestows little unqualified praise .
The closest he comes to enthusiasm is his report on the proceedings of a eugenics court .
The law provided for mandatory sterilization of people with certain hereditary disabilities , but sterilization decisions could be appealed .
Stoddard spent a day at the appeals court and was impressed : The “ subject , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for sterilization who was , in every case , present at the appeal and questioned once more by officials .
Stoddard thought that , if anything , the courts were overly hesitant to order sterilization for “ subjects ” who appeared to him obviously defective , but he gave the process high marks : “ On the evidence of that one visit , at least , the Sterilization Law is weeding out the worst strains in the German stock in a scientific and truly humanitarian way.
” Although the United States was not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not hope for war , he was continually sizing up Germany as a potential opponent .
He speculated on how long its food-stocks would last , whether Buna would work as a rubber substitute , and tried to keep his fingers on the pulse of civilian morale .
At the end of the book he wrote : The poignant accuracy of this passage is not surprising , coming from a man who so clearly foretold the consequences of policy choices in the United States .
Stoddard was a keen observer whether at home @ @ @

Into the Darkness, Lothrop Stoddard, Noontide Press, 2000, 311 pp.
Today it is impossible to dissent openly from racial orthodoxy without sooner or later being called a “Nazi.” Despite (or perhaps because of) the stupidity of doing so, egalitarians are quick to equate with Hitler anyone who endorses American racial views that antedate Hitler by centuries. Most liberals are not so silly as to call Lincoln a Nazi, but if he were to rise from the grave and restate his views from the debates with Douglas that is just one of many things they would call him.
The idea of a racial nation was National Socialism’s point of departure, but from the outset it was a comprehensive theory of applied government designed to funnel the energies of every German into collective goals. It was similar to Communism in this respect, and similar also in the sweeping institutional changes it imposed. In its historical period, however, racial policy was not the most striking aspect of Nazism. In the 1930s, the view that race was an essential element of the nation was no more foreign to Americans than to Germans—indeed, no more foreign than it is to virtually every non-white living today. It was hardly the distinctive characteristic of the regime.
What was distinctive? What, in fact, did racially aware Americans of the period — people whose ideas would, today, be called “Nazi”—think of the Third Reich? We have a fascinating answer in Into the Darkness, the last book by one of the most influential American champions of racial consciousness, Lothrop Stoddard.
Stoddard wrote this book—recently reissued as a trade paperback—after spending four months in Germany as a reporter during the “phony war” of 1939-40. A Harvard Ph.D. and foreign affairs specialist, Stoddard was particularly keen on understanding how war and Nazism had changed everyday life in Germany, and his account has a frank, contemporaneous quality untouched by the acrimony that became common after the United States went to war.
Many of Stoddard’s strongest impressions were colored as much by war as by the politics of the new regime. The title, for example, does not refer to a nation plunging into barbarism but to the rigorous blackout all Germans maintained against the possibility of night bombardment by the British. Darkness was, in fact, Stoddard’s first experience of Germany. Even the train by which he entered from Italy had to douse its lights at the border, and passengers crept about by the light of tiny blue bulbs. Stoddard couldn’t see the slightest glimmer from his train window, not even as he glided through Munich: “Passing through this great darkened city, the sense of unnatural silence and emptiness became positively oppressive.”
In Berlin, where he spent most of his four months, headlights of cars were heavily hooded, making it impossible to drive at night at speeds greater than a crawl. Pedestrians carried pocket flashlights to see where they were going, but were forbidden to shine them upwards to read street signs, since even a flashlight might catch the eye of a British bombardier. Stoddard hated the blackout, complaining that it had a “depressing, almost paralyzing effect. It must be lived to be understood.”
Another war-time measure Stoddard described in detail was the rationing regimen according to which everything including food and clothing was doled out with typically German efficiency. The government issued everyone—including travelers—monthly food coupons that had to be exchanged even for a restaurant meal. Coupons restricted quantity, not quality, so the rich ate better than the poor but not more. Stoddard found that when wealthy friends invited him to restaurants and paid for his meals, he still had to turn over coupons to the waiters because not even the rich had coupons to spare. Clothing and other goods were rationed the same way, in a system designed to “assure to the poorest German the basic necessities of life, while the richest cannot get much more than his share.”
Stoddard complained bitterly about the poor quality and limited variety of the food—Germans drank roasted barley rather than coffee because of the British naval blockade—but confessed there was enough starch in a German ration for him to put on 12 pounds in four months.
If even the privileged position of a foreign correspondent seemed grim to Stoddard, it is not surprising that he found no enthusiasm for the war: “The Germans detest this war . . . This attitude is shared by Nazis and non-Nazis. On this point there is no difference between them.” He wrote that most Germans never believed France and England would declare war over Poland but that even ardent Nazis were willing to criticize Hitler for taking the risk. Stoddard noted that memories of “the Great War” were still fresh enough to keep any hint of romance or overconfidence out of this one. But Stoddard found as much resolution as privation:
No intelligent foreigner can be in Germany a week without asking himself: ‘How do these people stand it?’ When he has been there a month, he says: ‘How long can they stand it?’ After three months, his verdict will probably be: ‘I guess they’ll stand it a long time.’
The reason, concluded Stoddard, was that Germans were convinced defeat would mean extinction for Germany, and that even if the war had been a great blunder, it was a crisis of titanic proportions that called for heroism.
‘An absolute dictatorship’
And what of Nazism itself? What most struck Stoddard was its revolutionary, authoritarian nature. “The National Socialist upheaval that has created the Third Reich,” he wrote “goes far deeper than the Fascist regime in Italy, and is perhaps a more defiant breach with the historic past than even the Communism of Soviet Russia.” “[I]ts leaders,” he added, “are revolutionists from the ground up.”
Many of the Nazi policies seemed similar to Communism: “Agriculture has basically been socialized,” he wrote, adding that the Nazis “co-ordinated everybody connected with industry into a huge vertical trust.” He wondered whether Hitler Youth programs and National Labor Service did not turn the lives of young people into one long Nazi summer camp. He complained about “the liquidation not only of the Catholic youth organizations but of most of the parochial schools as well.” He shuddered at the words of Bernhard Rust, Reich Minister of Education: “All forms of instruction have one aim—the shaping of the National Socialist human.” (emphasis in the original)
Stoddard was bemused by Strength Through Joy, or workplace-based leisure: “This is the most gigantic scheme of organized, state-directed entertainment that the world has ever seen. It includes a wide variety of activities, from ‘highbrow’ art and music to popular amusement, travel, and sport.” Germans seemed to enjoy it, but he added that “to the individualist Anglo-Saxon, all this regimented ‘leisure to order’ may not sound particularly attractive.”
By the end of his stay, Stoddard believed he had found the answer to riddles that baffled experts: “Nazi achievements in finance and industry are generally regarded as deep, dark mysteries abroad. To me, the answer is very simple: An absolute dictatorship over an industrious, resourceful people.” (emphasis in the original)
What about racial policies? As Rachel Dixon points out in a useful new introduction to this edition, Stoddard had been cool towards the Nazis from the beginning. In 1935 he wrote:
Support Russia Insider - Go Ad-Free! These [racial] ideas, however, are so mixed up with an ulcerated nationalism and are so surcharged with mere emotion that the resulting compound is hard to evaluate. Ever since the [First World] war, Germany has been highly abnormal in almost every respect.
One of the final passages of Into the Darkness suggests that four months of direct observation did not greatly change his views. When he finally found himself back among Americans on a steamship bound for home, he was delighted by creature comforts but by something else, too: “Even more deeply satisfying is the sense that you are among your own kind who are not worried and harassed and ulcerated by nationalistic hatreds.”
Stoddard writes surprisingly little about Jews, perhaps because he had little material:
The average German seems disinclined to talk much to the foreign visitor about this oppressed minority. However, I gathered that the general public does not approve of the violence and cruelty which Jews have suffered. But I also got the impression that, while the average German condemned such methods, he was not unwilling to see the Jews go and would not wish them back again.
Stoddard spoke good German, had lived in Austria, and generally liked Germans, but was not often impressed by Nazis. He concluded that polished and capable party members gravitated to Berlin but the provincial leavings were a sorry lot. He described officials he met in Weimar:
Support Russia Insider - Go Ad-Free! Few of them could have amounted to much before they landed a Party job. Even more revealing were their womenfolk . . . Most of them were pretentiously dowdy. They exemplified better than anything I had yet seen the fact that National Socialism is not merely a political and economic upheaval but a social revolution as well. To a very large extent it has brought the lower middle class to power.
Stoddard took an immediate dislike to a Gauleiter he met in Deusseldorf: “He was a distinctly sinister-looking type; hard-faced, with a cruel eye and a still crueler mouth. A sadist, if I ever saw one. I imagine how unpopular he must be among the good-natured, kindly Duesseldorfers.”
Stoddard managed to interview several top Nazis, including Hitler—who seems to have disappointed him by being insufficiently mesmerizing. He contrasted the Führer to Mussolini:
[Mussolini] uses his big, compelling eyes; thrusts out his chin; aims to semi-hypnotize you. It’s all very intriguing. Perhaps, to an Anglo-Saxon, it’s a bit too obvious. But it flatters your ego, just the same. Nothing like that with Hitler. Though always pleasant and courteous, he makes no obvious attempt to impress or win you.
Of the top Nazis, Goebbels seems to cut the most distinctive figure: “This lithe, brunet Rhinelander, with his agile mind, cynical humor, and telling gestures, is an excellent person to interview. He is mentally on his toes every instant, and he is full of what the journalist calls ‘good lines.’”
Stoddard notes the Nazi’s accomplishments—resurrection of an inert economy, a clampdown on crime, full employment—but bestows little unqualified praise. The closest he comes to enthusiasm is his report on the proceedings of a eugenics court. The law provided for mandatory sterilization of people with certain hereditary disabilities, but sterilization decisions could be appealed. Stoddard spent a day at the appeals court and was impressed:
The thing that struck me most was the meticulous care with which these cases had already been considered by the lower tribunals. The dossier of each case was voluminous, containing a complete life-history of the subject, reports of specialists and clinics, and also exhaustive researches into the subject’s family history.
The “subject,” of course, was the candidate for sterilization who was, in every case, present at the appeal and questioned once more by officials. Stoddard thought that, if anything, the courts were overly hesitant to order sterilization for “subjects” who appeared to him obviously defective, but he gave the process high marks: “On the evidence of that one visit, at least, the Sterilization Law is weeding out the worst strains in the German stock in a scientific and truly humanitarian way.”
Although the United States was not at war with Germany and Stoddard did not hope for war, he was continually sizing up Germany as a potential opponent. He speculated on how long its food-stocks would last, whether Buna would work as a rubber substitute, and tried to keep his fingers on the pulse of civilian morale. At the end of the book he wrote:
Most Germans are unwilling to admit even the possibility of defeat. Those who do, couple it with remarks which amount to some such phrase as: ‘If we don’t win, there will be no victor.’ What that means is about as follows: ‘If this war is fought to the bitter end, all Europe will be plunged into chaotic ruin. Then, with everybody down in the ditch together, we Germans, with our innate sense of organization and discipline, willingness to work hard, and knack of pulling together, can lift ourselves out of the ditch quicker than anyone else.
The poignant accuracy of this passage is not surprising, coming from a man who so clearly foretold the consequences of policy choices in the United States. Stoddard was a keen observer whether at home or abroad.


russia-insider--2020-10-18--Macron Is a Traitor to White People Everywhere

This article from our archives was first published on RI in January 2019 “ To see and not to speak would be the great betrayal , ” said Enoch Powell .
Worse is to see , to know , to speak , and then act destructively anyway .
Angela Merkel , White Renegade of the Year 2015 , did this when she welcomed a massive migrant flow into Europe years after declaring multiculturalism was a failure .
Yet this year ’ s renegade has less excuse .
He clearly warned of the consequences of mass immigration , but still pushes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ face of failure and furious opposition .
This year ’ s White Renegade of the Year is the president of the French Republic , Emmanuel Macron .
President Macron won election in 2017 thanks to a quirk of the electoral system .
In a runoff against the nationalist Marine Le Pen and her National Front , he won a commanding 66 percent of the vote , compared to about 34 percent for Mrs. Le-Pen .
Many voters were motivated not by Mr. Macron ’ s positive vision , but by a desire to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ large number of voters abstained in the second round and almost ten percent turned in blank ballots in protest .
Mr. Macron acknowledged many had not voted for him out of agreement , but “ simply to defend the Republic ” —thus implicitly banishing Marine Le Pen and her supporters from republican legitimacy .
Still , Mr. Macron surprised some critics in his early months .
He seemed different from the typical liberal politician .
Early on , he became friends with President Donald Trump , who appeared far more comfortable with President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Macron mused about the vacuum in French politics created by the absence of monarchy , and the need for strong personal leadership .
Though this led to some criticism , President Macron also tried to restore dignity both to his office and politics generally , notably scolding a youth for addressing him by an informal nickname .
More importantly , President Macron spoke seriously about the problems of mass immigration and overpopulation in the Third World .
He shocked journalists by dismissing a suggestion that a “ Marshall Plan for Africa ” would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the “ essential challenges ” was Africa ’ s high birthrate .
Accusations of colonialism , imperialism , and of course racism came from all quarters , including the supposed conservatives at National Review .
President Macron defended the distinction between economic migrants and asylum seekers , and even cracked down on immigration in ways that some journalists called “ brutal.
” President Macron shepherded a bill through the legislature that expedited deportation of failed asylum seekers .
It was condemned by some nationalists as not strong enough , but it was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Finally , President Macron spoke about the need for Europe to develop a coordinated approach to refugees , saying in an interview that had such an approach existed years ago , “ we would never have had to deal with that first route from the Balkans that allowed millions of refugees to come to Europe.
” President Macron thus identified the policy that could save the European Union .
President Macron is one of the EU ’ s greatest defenders and even played the European anthem , “ Ode to Joy , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have called President Macron a potential “ savior of Europe ” from nationalism and the “ far-right.
” Yet the best way for President Macron to do this would be to organize a continent-wide approach to stopping immigration .
Steve Sailer has repeatedly argued that the European Union would become more popular if it halted immigration .
It would also mean the European Union would be “ pro-European ” instead of “ pro-Syrian , pro-Afghan , and pro-Eritrean.
” One continuing discussion among white advocates is whether an imperial Western empire or a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ homelands is better .
The current European Union is the worst of both .
The EU ’ s bureaucrats strip sovereignty from European nation-states , repress patriots , and govern like petty tyrants .
While embracing all the worst features of empire , they act in ways that are utterly alien from the peoples they govern .
It ’ s like living under a council of diversity coordinators that has the power of Napoleon Bonaparte .
Most white advocates therefore support nationalism and limiting the European Union ’ s power , if not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not have to be this way .
The most forceful argument for a centralized European Union organized along racial lines came from Sir Oswald Mosley ’ s postwar concept of “ Europe a Nation.
” Even some supporters of European populism recognize the advantages of the European Union , including the currency union , free travel , and the possibility of a common defense .
Solid majorities in every European nation ( except Italy ) believe their countries have benefited from membership .
Marine Le Pen ’ s call to withdraw from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ minority of French voters and probably hurt her chances in the election .
Populism is a growing force and nationalism is far from dead , but Europeans generally do not want to leave the EU , whatever true nationalists think about it .
The union ’ s current approach to immigration is deeply cynical , with nations trying to pawn off unwanted migrants on each other while they talk piously about collective responsibilities .
Instead of forming a community of common interests , the European Union ’ s courts are trying to force @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hundreds of thousands of unwanted aliens .
Of course , these migrants wouldn ’ t be in Europe were it not for Angela Merkel ’ s unilateral decision to put out the welcome mat for Third World refugees or the decision by several Western governments to overthrow Muammar Gaddafi .
As it now operates , the European Union is a civilizational suicide pact .
Yet most Europeans , even Eastern Europeans , grumble and put up with it because they don ’ t want to lose the benefits of membership .
Thus , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Macron if he was serious about reforming the Union .
With common sense border-control and a collective approach to stopping migration , President Macron could have turned the EU into a civilizational defense pact .
Such an approach would have meant President Macron could have credibly pushed for greater European centralization and even a European army—perhaps fulfilling his quasi-imperial pretensions .
It would also have co-opted much of the support for populist , anti-immigrant political parties .
President Macron did not do this .
Instead , he appointed himself the successor to Angela @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have been the Italian elections in March , in which anti-immigration populists triumphed and eventually formed an anti-establishment government .
Initially , President Macron acknowledged that Italian frustration over immigration was justified and partly explained the results .
Of course , President Macron bears some responsibility for the results himself because he angered Italian authorities in 2017 by refusing to take migrants off their hands .
Unfortunately , rather than being chastened by the election , President Macron hardened his opposition against Europe ’ s populists , particularly the governments of Italy and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Macron may have been following the advice of elite journalists who called him a champion of “ European values , ” if not European people .
After the Italian elections , the Washington Post ’ s editorial board urged him—ludicrously—to ” rescue democracy.
” In April , in a speech to the US Congress , President Macron attacked “ isolationism , withdrawal , and nationalism.
” In June , Mr. Macron picked a fight with the Italian government : After Italy prevented an NGO ’ s ship from landing migrants in the country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and irresponsibility , ” and a spokesman for his party said the policy “ makes me vomit.
” Italy ’ s prime minister accurately retorted that France had not met its own immigration obligations .
Mr. Macron backed down , claiming he didn ’ t mean to offend the Italians .
European leaders , including Mr. Macron and Prime Minister Conte of Italy then signed an immigration agreement , though the exact terms were vague .
Despite this brief peace , in June , President Macron called himself the “ main opponent ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Hungary and Interior Minister Matteo Salvini of Italy—the two most prominent Europeans who speak for the West .
“ It is clear that today a strong opposition is building up between nationalists and progressives and I will yield nothing to nationalists and those who advocate hate speech , ” he said in August .
The next month , he threatened to withhold funding from countries that would not accept migrants .
This was astonishing since France is regularly criticized for refusing to accept refugees and for dumping them on Italy .
Indeed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ claim French police drove black men across the border in a van and released them into the woods .
In September , President Macron ’ s quest to restore gravitas to his office suffered a blow when he was photographed a with two young black men in Saint-Martin .
One of the men is shirtless and giving the camera the middle finger .
This makes his lecture to a young Frenchmen about respect seem ridiculous .
President Macron refused to apologize , even taking the opportunity to attack Marine Le Pen in self-righteous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the republic ’ s children , whatever their past troubles , ” he said , referring to the young man ’ s run-ins with the authorities that the media brought to light .
As if on cue , one of the men was reportedly arrested for drug possession and resisting arrest about a year after the photo op .
President Macron is now in open battle with Prime Minister Orban and Interior Minister Salvini .
“ We ’ ve accepted this political divide and are organizing around it , ” said one French @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a “ logic of combat.
” In preparation for the EU elections in May , President Macron met Mark Zuckerberg to set up the first-ever partnership between Facebook and a national government to police “ hate speech.
” President Macron also insulted President Trump at a Remembrance Day ceremony .
“ Patriotism is the exact opposite of nationalism ; nationalism is a betrayal of patriotism , ” he said in what was clearly an open attack .
In December , President Macron ended the year by signing the UN Migration Pact , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” This action reportedly drew accusations of “ treason ” from some generals .
Of course , whatever aspirations President Macron may have to being a European or global leader , his biggest problems now are domestic .
The “ yellow vests ” protests against his tax hikes and neoliberal economic policies aren ’ t stopping , and may bolster his opponents in the upcoming EU elections .
While the protesters don ’ t share a common political program , polls suggest that many are nationalists , and almost all the members of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Front ) support the movement .
Originally , the French government even blamed Marine Le Pen for starting the demonstrations .
Some videos show protesters ripping down EU flags .
The French police have responded with notable brutality .
Amnesty International claims it “ has documented numerous instances of excessive use of force by police.
” Le Monde , arguably the most prestigious French newspaper , even likened Mr. Macron to Adolf Hitler ( though it later apologized ) .
Yet the mainstream media in the English-speaking world still largely supports President Macron @ @ @ @ @ @ @ France is a danger to all of Europe , ” writes Natalie Nougayrede of The Guardian in a typical piece .
The obvious response is , “ Which Europe ?
” The Hungarian and Italian governments are President Macron ’ s primary foes , yet both are stronger than his administration today .
Though Prime Minister Orban ’ s government is encountering widespread protests in response to economic reforms and the Fidesz party is dropping in the polls , it is still the dominant political party .
In Italy , Interior Minister Salvini @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lead over all other parties .
Interior Minister Salvini is downplaying his prior opposition to the Euro and is instead creating a broader-based populist movement .
If the May EU elections go well , he may even attempt to take control of the Italian government by pulling out of the coalition with the Five Star Movement .
In contrast , a recent poll taken just before Christmas found President Macron is now supported by just 23 percent of voters .
For comparison ’ s sake , even in the midst of a government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ media , President Donald Trump ’ s approval rating is above 40 percent .
According to some polls , Marine Le Pen ’ s National Rally party is leading President Macron ’ s party , only five months before the 2019 EU elections .
Adding to his political woes , President Macron is also ending the year with a scandal , as a former aide fired for beating a protester admitted he kept using his diplomatic passport .
Despite all of this , President Macron is unlikely to back down .
Members of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way to combat nationalism is to strengthen the European Union .
Though the protests have shaken his government , President Macron is far from finished and still enjoys a parliamentary majority .
More importantly , though nationalists are gaining strength in both Germany and France , so is the hard Left .
There is no sign of a nationalist takeover in either country anytime soon .
Emmanuel Macron is a tragic figure because he could do so much good with even moderate reforms .
He could save the European Union he loves so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hates .
What ’ s more , his extraordinary comments about Africa suggest he is more aware of the long-term problems facing the world than any other Western leader except Prime Minister Orban .
Yet for all the media excitement about President Macron ’ s youthful leadership for the EU , his ideas are nothing new .
His France is an administrative entity .
His European Union is an anti-European bureaucracy dispossessing the indigenous nations , cultures , and peoples .
His “ democracy , ” in league with Mr. Zuckerberg , allows @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it attacks demonstrators just as eagerly as “ authoritarian ” Hungary or Russia .
Like Angela Merkel , President Macron is bringing on “ preventable evils , ” and unlike her , there ’ s reason to believe he knows it won ’ t work .
He is acting as if he would rather preside over a continent of ashes than the Republic of the French .
President Emmanuel Macron is the White Renegade of the Year—and unfortunately , he is just getting started .

This article from our archives was first published on RI in January 2019
“To see and not to speak would be the great betrayal,” said Enoch Powell. Worse is to see, to know, to speak, and then act destructively anyway. Angela Merkel, White Renegade of the Year 2015, did this when she welcomed a massive migrant flow into Europe years after declaring multiculturalism was a failure. Yet this year’s renegade has less excuse. He clearly warned of the consequences of mass immigration, but still pushes catastrophic policies on his people—even in the face of failure and furious opposition. This year’s White Renegade of the Year is the president of the French Republic, Emmanuel Macron.
President Macron won election in 2017 thanks to a quirk of the electoral system. In a runoff against the nationalist Marine Le Pen and her National Front, he won a commanding 66 percent of the vote, compared to about 34 percent for Mrs. Le-Pen. Many voters were motivated not by Mr. Macron’s positive vision, but by a desire to stop the National Front. A relatively large number of voters abstained in the second round and almost ten percent turned in blank ballots in protest. Mr. Macron acknowledged many had not voted for him out of agreement, but “simply to defend the Republic”—thus implicitly banishing Marine Le Pen and her supporters from republican legitimacy.
Still, Mr. Macron surprised some critics in his early months. He seemed different from the typical liberal politician. Early on, he became friends with President Donald Trump, who appeared far more comfortable with President Macron than with Chancellor Merkel. President Macron mused about the vacuum in French politics created by the absence of monarchy, and the need for strong personal leadership. Though this led to some criticism, President Macron also tried to restore dignity both to his office and politics generally, notably scolding a youth for addressing him by an informal nickname.
More importantly, President Macron spoke seriously about the problems of mass immigration and overpopulation in the Third World. He shocked journalists by dismissing a suggestion that a “Marshall Plan for Africa” would do any good, and said one of the “essential challenges” was Africa’s high birthrate. Accusations of colonialism, imperialism, and of course racism came from all quarters, including the supposed conservatives at National Review. President Macron defended the distinction between economic migrants and asylum seekers, and even cracked down on immigration in ways that some journalists called “brutal.”
President Macron shepherded a bill through the legislature that expedited deportation of failed asylum seekers. It was condemned by some nationalists as not strong enough, but it was still a defense of French sovereignty. Finally, President Macron spoke about the need for Europe to develop a coordinated approach to refugees, saying in an interview that had such an approach existed years ago, “we would never have had to deal with that first route from the Balkans that allowed millions of refugees to come to Europe.”
President Macron thus identified the policy that could save the European Union. President Macron is one of the EU’s greatest defenders and even played the European anthem, “Ode to Joy,” after his election victory. Many journalists have called President Macron a potential “savior of Europe” from nationalism and the “far-right.” Yet the best way for President Macron to do this would be to organize a continent-wide approach to stopping immigration. Steve Sailer has repeatedly argued that the European Union would become more popular if it halted immigration. It would also mean the European Union would be “pro-European” instead of “pro-Syrian, pro-Afghan, and pro-Eritrean.”
One continuing discussion among white advocates is whether an imperial Western empire or a looser union of separate, independent ethnic homelands is better. The current European Union is the worst of both. The EU’s bureaucrats strip sovereignty from European nation-states, repress patriots, and govern like petty tyrants. While embracing all the worst features of empire, they act in ways that are utterly alien from the peoples they govern. It’s like living under a council of diversity coordinators that has the power of Napoleon Bonaparte.
Most white advocates therefore support nationalism and limiting the European Union’s power, if not dismantling it altogether. Yet it did not have to be this way. The most forceful argument for a centralized European Union organized along racial lines came from Sir Oswald Mosley’s postwar concept of “Europe a Nation.” Even some supporters of European populism recognize the advantages of the European Union, including the currency union, free travel, and the possibility of a common defense. Solid majorities in every European nation (except Italy) believe their countries have benefited from membership. Marine Le Pen’s call to withdraw from the monetary union was supported by only a minority of French voters and probably hurt her chances in the election. Populism is a growing force and nationalism is far from dead, but Europeans generally do not want to leave the EU, whatever true nationalists think about it.
The union’s current approach to immigration is deeply cynical, with nations trying to pawn off unwanted migrants on each other while they talk piously about collective responsibilities. Instead of forming a community of common interests, the European Union’s courts are trying to force states like Hungary or Slovakia to swallow hundreds of thousands of unwanted aliens.
Of course, these migrants wouldn’t be in Europe were it not for Angela Merkel’s unilateral decision to put out the welcome mat for Third World refugees or the decision by several Western governments to overthrow Muammar Gaddafi. As it now operates, the European Union is a civilizational suicide pact. Yet most Europeans, even Eastern Europeans, grumble and put up with it because they don’t want to lose the benefits of membership.
Thus, there was a real opening for Emmanuel Macron if he was serious about reforming the Union. With common sense border-control and a collective approach to stopping migration, President Macron could have turned the EU into a civilizational defense pact. Such an approach would have meant President Macron could have credibly pushed for greater European centralization and even a European army—perhaps fulfilling his quasi-imperial pretensions. It would also have co-opted much of the support for populist, anti-immigrant political parties.
President Macron did not do this. Instead, he appointed himself the successor to Angela Merkel. The turning point seems to have been the Italian elections in March, in which anti-immigration populists triumphed and eventually formed an anti-establishment government. Initially, President Macron acknowledged that Italian frustration over immigration was justified and partly explained the results. Of course, President Macron bears some responsibility for the results himself because he angered Italian authorities in 2017 by refusing to take migrants off their hands. Unfortunately, rather than being chastened by the election, President Macron hardened his opposition against Europe’s populists, particularly the governments of Italy and Hungary.
In so doing, President Macron may have been following the advice of elite journalists who called him a champion of “European values,” if not European people. After the Italian elections, the Washington Post’s editorial board urged him—ludicrously—to ”rescue democracy.” In April, in a speech to the US Congress, President Macron attacked “isolationism, withdrawal, and nationalism.”
In June, Mr. Macron picked a fight with the Italian government: After Italy prevented an NGO’s ship from landing migrants in the country, President Macron raged against “cynicism and irresponsibility,” and a spokesman for his party said the policy “makes me vomit.” Italy’s prime minister accurately retorted that France had not met its own immigration obligations. Mr. Macron backed down, claiming he didn’t mean to offend the Italians. European leaders, including Mr. Macron and Prime Minister Conte of Italy then signed an immigration agreement, though the exact terms were vague.
Despite this brief peace, in June, President Macron called himself the “main opponent” of nationalist leaders Prime Minister Viktor Orban of Hungary and Interior Minister Matteo Salvini of Italy—the two most prominent Europeans who speak for the West. “It is clear that today a strong opposition is building up between nationalists and progressives and I will yield nothing to nationalists and those who advocate hate speech,” he said in August. The next month, he threatened to withhold funding from countries that would not accept migrants. This was astonishing since France is regularly criticized for refusing to accept refugees and for dumping them on Italy. Indeed, that same month, Italian witnesses claim French police drove black men across the border in a van and released them into the woods.
In September, President Macron’s quest to restore gravitas to his office suffered a blow when he was photographed a with two young black men in Saint-Martin. One of the men is shirtless and giving the camera the middle finger. This makes his lecture to a young Frenchmen about respect seem ridiculous. President Macron refused to apologize, even taking the opportunity to attack Marine Le Pen in self-righteous terms. “I love all of the republic’s children, whatever their past troubles,” he said, referring to the young man’s run-ins with the authorities that the media brought to light. As if on cue, one of the men was reportedly arrested for drug possession and resisting arrest about a year after the photo op.
President Macron is now in open battle with Prime Minister Orban and Interior Minister Salvini. “We’ve accepted this political divide and are organizing around it,” said one French official, adding that the government was in a “logic of combat.” In preparation for the EU elections in May, President Macron met Mark Zuckerberg to set up the first-ever partnership between Facebook and a national government to police “hate speech.” President Macron also insulted President Trump at a Remembrance Day ceremony. “Patriotism is the exact opposite of nationalism; nationalism is a betrayal of patriotism,” he said in what was clearly an open attack. In December, President Macron ended the year by signing the UN Migration Pact, which he called “laudable and desirable.” This action reportedly drew accusations of “treason” from some generals.
Of course, whatever aspirations President Macron may have to being a European or global leader, his biggest problems now are domestic. The “yellow vests” protests against his tax hikes and neoliberal economic policies aren’t stopping, and may bolster his opponents in the upcoming EU elections. While the protesters don’t share a common political program, polls suggest that many are nationalists, and almost all the members of the National Rally (the rebranded National Front) support the movement. Originally, the French government even blamed Marine Le Pen for starting the demonstrations. Some videos show protesters ripping down EU flags.
French yellow vest protesters tear down EU flag in move against globalism. pic.twitter.com/IxY1z0Ttd1 — Voice of Europe ? (@V_of_Europe) December 30, 2018
The French police have responded with notable brutality. Amnesty International claims it “has documented numerous instances of excessive use of force by police.” Le Monde, arguably the most prestigious French newspaper, even likened Mr. Macron to Adolf Hitler (though it later apologized). Yet the mainstream media in the English-speaking world still largely supports President Macron. “Macron’s crisis in France is a danger to all of Europe,” writes Natalie Nougayrede of The Guardian in a typical piece.
The obvious response is, “Which Europe?” The Hungarian and Italian governments are President Macron’s primary foes, yet both are stronger than his administration today. Though Prime Minister Orban’s government is encountering widespread protests in response to economic reforms and the Fidesz party is dropping in the polls, it is still the dominant political party. In Italy, Interior Minister Salvini’s Lega party commands a strong lead over all other parties. Interior Minister Salvini is downplaying his prior opposition to the Euro and is instead creating a broader-based populist movement. If the May EU elections go well, he may even attempt to take control of the Italian government by pulling out of the coalition with the Five Star Movement.
Italy, BiDiMedia poll:
EU election
LEGA-ENF: 34% (+1)
M5S-EFDD: 25% (-1)
PD-S&D: 17%
FI-EPP: 7%
FdI-ECR: 4%
+E-ALDE: 4% (+1)
CC-*: 4% (+1)
A1-MDP-S&D: 1%
SVP/UP-EPP: 0%
+/- with Nov 2018
Field work: 17-21 Dec 2018
Sample size: 1,018#EP2019
➤ https://t.co/yZmKw0FzEV pic.twitter.com/PoFeMXWiPc — Europe Elects (@EuropeElects) December 29, 2018
In contrast, a recent poll taken just before Christmas found President Macron is now supported by just 23 percent of voters. For comparison’s sake, even in the midst of a government shutdown and in the face of furious media, President Donald Trump’s approval rating is above 40 percent. According to some polls, Marine Le Pen’s National Rally party is leading President Macron’s party, only five months before the 2019 EU elections. Adding to his political woes, President Macron is also ending the year with a scandal, as a former aide fired for beating a protester admitted he kept using his diplomatic passport.
Despite all of this, President Macron is unlikely to back down. Members of his party have argued that the best way to combat nationalism is to strengthen the European Union. Though the protests have shaken his government, President Macron is far from finished and still enjoys a parliamentary majority. More importantly, though nationalists are gaining strength in both Germany and France, so is the hard Left. There is no sign of a nationalist takeover in either country anytime soon.
Emmanuel Macron is a tragic figure because he could do so much good with even moderate reforms. He could save the European Union he loves so much and defeat the nationalists he so hates. What’s more, his extraordinary comments about Africa suggest he is more aware of the long-term problems facing the world than any other Western leader except Prime Minister Orban.
A Yellow Vest carries a placard reading “President Liar.” (Credit Image: © Alain Pitton/NurPhoto via ZUMA Press)
Yet for all the media excitement about President Macron’s youthful leadership for the EU, his ideas are nothing new. His France is an administrative entity. His European Union is an anti-European bureaucracy dispossessing the indigenous nations, cultures, and peoples. His “democracy,” in league with Mr. Zuckerberg, allows only certain views to be expressed and it attacks demonstrators just as eagerly as “authoritarian” Hungary or Russia. Like Angela Merkel, President Macron is bringing on “preventable evils,” and unlike her, there’s reason to believe he knows it won’t work. He is acting as if he would rather preside over a continent of ashes than the Republic of the French. President Emmanuel Macron is the White Renegade of the Year—and unfortunately, he is just getting started.


russia-insider--2020-10-19--The Extraordinary American Professor Who Photographed the Striking Christian Architecture of Russia'

The Extraordinary American Professor Who Photographed the Striking Christian Architecture of Russia's North

What Americans know about Russian architecture is mainly thanks to the work of one man , who has photographed the country since 1970 This article from our archives was first published on RI in February 2019 Editors Note : This article is from a series by and about the invaluable William Brumfield , ( Wikipedia ) , Professor of Slavic Studies at Tulane University , New Orleans , USA .
Brumfield is the world 's leading historian of Russian architecture .
He makes frequent trips to Russia , often to her remote regions , and records the most unusual examples @ @ @ @ @ @ @ photography .
Most of the buildings he photographs is of remote churches and monasteries .
His most recent book is a real treasure , Architecture At The End Of The Earth , Photographing The Russian North ( 2015 ) .
( Amazon ) .
This truly beautiful book was made possible by the support of a US philanthropist , and its true cost is 3 times its retail price , and we ca n't recommend it highly enough .
Here is our 2015 review of it .
Bravo to RBTH for making Brumfield @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a great platform for his beautiful photography .
We recommend visiting the RBTH page , which has a slide show for each article with many more pictures than we can fit in here .
Do n't believe in miracles ?
Well , we can assure you , Brumfield 's work is undoubtedly just that .
It ’ s not easy to get William Brumfield to talk about himself .
For Brumfield , 71 , the foremost authority on Russian architecture in the U.S. , the focus of any conversation is the work .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , is the photography .
Although photography has defined Brumfield ’ s career , he did not train as a photographer .
He studied Slavic languages and literature at the University of California at Berkeley , receiving his PhD in 1973 .
Perhaps fittingly , he first picked up a camera on his first trip to the Soviet Union in 1970 .
The only time a conversation with Brumfield hints at anything personal is when he talks about the connection between the Russian North and his native American South .
Like the South @ @ @ @ @ @ @ structures that tell the story of a culture clinging to its heritage while searching for a way forward .
Born in Charlotte , North Carolina , Brumfield did his undergraduate work at Tulane University in New Orleans , where he has also taught since 1980 .
A tireless advocate for the recognition and preservation of Russian architecture , Brumfield has published countless articles in English and Russian as well as several major books , including “ A History of Russian Architecture , ” ( 1993 ) widely used as a textbook in Russian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” ( 1995 ) which Brumfield described as a book that tried to put Russian architecture into a familiar Western context , “ this trope of the ruin as a point of meditation.
” His more recent work , including “ Architecture at the End of the Earth , ” which was published in June , approaches Russian architecture more on its own terms , as an anomaly that doesn ’ t fit into the traditional narrative of Western art and architectural history .
He has received numerous accolades for his work over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2000 , but he says he doesn ’ t seek out these opportunities , rather they find their way to him .
When the National Gallery of Art approached him about creating an archive of his photographs in 1985 , he says it was “ not because of some abstract idea — we need to fill in Russia , there ’ s a gap here — but because they saw an article of mine and my photographs.
” The National Gallery archive led to connections at the Library of Congress , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ turn led to other grants .
For now , Brumfield is focusing is on archiving the images that exist in pre-digital form — as well as taking more .
Last winter , he was invited to photograph the memorial to victims of the Gulag in Norilsk , a formerly closed city that even today requires an invitation to visit .
He has been approached about doing a book on Siberia , but is concerned about the time it would take to develop a unifying concept for such a vast area and make the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would like to do a trip to the Russian south and photograph some cities he has never visited , including Krasnodar and Astrakhan .
Such a trip would take him in the footsteps of early 20th century photographer Sergei Prokudin-Gorsky , whose early color photographs of imperial Russia prefigured Brumfield ’ s own work .
Although he says that he has spent more time in Russia than any American who doesn ’ t live here , Brumfield has no desire to move to Russia and do photography full time , because that would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like to see more articles like this ?
Our fundraising goal has not yet been met , and we would be very grateful for your help .
It takes a full time staff to keep this website going , and our workers need to feed their families .
A recurring donation of even $ 15 or $ 25 per month would be a huge blessing .

What Americans know about Russian architecture is mainly thanks to the work of one man, who has photographed the country since 1970
This article from our archives was first published on RI in February 2019
Editors Note: This article is from a series by and about the invaluable William Brumfield, (Wikipedia), Professor of Slavic Studies at Tulane University, New Orleans, USA.
Brumfield is the world's leading historian of Russian architecture. He makes frequent trips to Russia, often to her remote regions, and records the most unusual examples of surviving architecture with detailed, professional photography. Most of the buildings he photographs is of remote churches and monasteries.
His most recent book is a real treasure, Architecture At The End Of The Earth, Photographing The Russian North (2015). (Amazon). This truly beautiful book was made possible by the support of a US philanthropist, and its true cost is 3 times its retail price, and we can't recommend it highly enough. Here is our 2015 review of it.
Bravo to RBTH for making Brumfield's work possible, and providing such a great platform for his beautiful photography. We recommend visiting the RBTH page, which has a slide show for each article with many more pictures than we can fit in here.
Don't believe in miracles? Well, we can assure you, Brumfield's work is undoubtedly just that.
It’s not easy to get William Brumfield to talk about himself. For Brumfield, 71, the foremost authority on Russian architecture in the U.S., the focus of any conversation is the work. And the work, first and foremost, is the photography.
“The photography has always been the fulcrum for me to convey this knowledge that I have about Russian culture and architecture,” Brumfield said.
William Craft Brumfield, photographer and historian of Russian architecture.
Although photography has defined Brumfield’s career, he did not train as a photographer. He studied Slavic languages and literature at the University of California at Berkeley, receiving his PhD in 1973. Perhaps fittingly, he first picked up a camera on his first trip to the Soviet Union in 1970.
The only time a conversation with Brumfield hints at anything personal is when he talks about the connection between the Russian North and his native American South.
Like the South, the Russian North is full of structures that tell the story of a culture clinging to its heritage while searching for a way forward.
“For all the losses, the trauma… there is an extraordinary wealth, much of it in a ruined state. But for the historian, the ruin is also important. This is something of extraordinary power. What created it? Because there’s nothing visible sustaining it now.”
Born in Charlotte, North Carolina, Brumfield did his undergraduate work at Tulane University in New Orleans, where he has also taught since 1980.
A tireless advocate for the recognition and preservation of Russian architecture, Brumfield has published countless articles in English and Russian as well as several major books, including “A History of Russian Architecture,” (1993) widely used as a textbook in Russian studies courses and “Lost Russia,” (1995) which Brumfield described as a book that tried to put Russian architecture into a familiar Western context, “this trope of the ruin as a point of meditation.”
His more recent work, including “Architecture at the End of the Earth,” which was published in June, approaches Russian architecture more on its own terms, as an anomaly that doesn’t fit into the traditional narrative of Western art and architectural history.
“It’s interesting because it’s Russia,” he said, adding that in his view, “architecture is as much an expression of Russia as its music or literature. Although it’s rare to find any of the great novelists talking about the architecture of a church, for example, that ambience is there.”
He has received numerous accolades for his work over the years, including a Guggenheim Fellowship in 2000, but he says he doesn’t seek out these opportunities, rather they find their way to him.
When the National Gallery of Art approached him about creating an archive of his photographs in 1985, he says it was “not because of some abstract idea — we need to fill in Russia, there’s a gap here — but because they saw an article of mine and my photographs.”
The National Gallery archive led to connections at the Library of Congress, which supported other research trips, which in turn led to other grants.
“These linkages have been so unpredictable in my career, but the image has to be there,” he said. “There’s a higher logic here that goes beyond anything that I could have predicted, it’s the power of the image — it never ceases to amaze me how people respond to that.”
Brumfield’s unique ability to create these powerful images of Russian architecture comes from his roots as a scholar of Russia itself, according to Blair Ruble, former director of the Kennan Institute in Washington, DC and a longtime friend of Brumfield. “His interests grew from his love of Russian culture, which makes his photography different from that of an architectural photographer. No one – certainly no foreigner, and only a handful of Russians at most – have ever attempted as comprehensive a compendium of the Russian built environment as has Brumfield,” Ruble said.
For now, Brumfield is focusing is on archiving the images that exist in pre-digital form — as well as taking more.
Last winter, he was invited to photograph the memorial to victims of the Gulag in Norilsk, a formerly closed city that even today requires an invitation to visit.
He has been approached about doing a book on Siberia, but is concerned about the time it would take to develop a unifying concept for such a vast area and make the trips to take the photographs. He would like to do a trip to the Russian south and photograph some cities he has never visited, including Krasnodar and Astrakhan. Such a trip would take him in the footsteps of early 20th century photographer Sergei Prokudin-Gorsky, whose early color photographs of imperial Russia prefigured Brumfield’s own work.
“I’m whittling down this menu of options, but fate has a way of determining these journeys,” he said.
“How much I’ll be able to get done in my allotted span is very much an open question. I’ve become almost fatalistic about it now.”
Although he says that he has spent more time in Russia than any American who doesn’t live here, Brumfield has no desire to move to Russia and do photography full time, because that would mean giving up teaching.
“We’re trying to create educated citizens and they need to know something about Russian culture,” he said. “To the extent that my work can reach out to our students, that’s good. I do my job and I have to believe that it’s going to make a difference to someone, because I know that the people who started me on this journey were just dedicated teachers, not art historians.”
Would you like to see more articles like this? Our fundraising goal has not yet been met, and we would be very grateful for your help.
It takes a full time staff to keep this website going, and our workers need to feed their families. A recurring donation of even $15 or $25 per month would be a huge blessing.