Poland, Imported Aliens, and Brexit

I have no idea how I reached this video. Just a YouTube chain mutating. It is seriously non-PC and straight up says Germany is committing cultural genocide on itself (though in different words).

What interests me more about it is well off the main line of the video. Most of the time it spends looking at Poland and their refusal to accept African and Middle Eastern “migrants”. How that has helped Poland, and the pressures being put on Poland by the EU. Even to the point of threatening expulsion if Poland refuses force immigration.

Now the first thing that brings to mind is BREXIT. It would seem that to be allowed (or forced) out of the EU all one needs to do is refuse to be overrun by third world poverty and reject immigration. Golly, who knew? So if BREXIT talks break down, well, now you know what to do!

The next thought to percolate was: How long until this video is banned? Or is it that being EU focused it doesn’t matter to the US Midterm election outcome, so no need for Google & The Left to meddle?

Finally, given that Germany is culturally suicidal, BREXIT grinds on, Poland and Hungary are holding firm so the EU is saying they will be ejected, Turkey is no longer meeting (or even trying to meet) EU ascension rules and is turning toward the BRICS instead, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Greece and a few others are in financial messes and can’t get employment up (last I looked) while places like France, Belgium, and Sweden are on track to be gang rape and terrorist attack centers (per published events in mainstream news): Just what glue will be holding Europe together and making it a success?

Is the EU entering a terminal fracturing stage?

There are other thought too… the video does make me think. Like to what extent monument purges in Poland are like Confederate history purges here. Will forgetting that history fuel a repeat? To what extent DID the EU create the Ukraine mess by deposing an elected government? On and on.

So watch, then think a little. It can be a it irritating, but that often leads to the deepest thoughts.

BTW, “STRONK” is like PWNED. It is a sarcastic misspelling of “STRONG”.

Subscribe to feed


About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in Political Current Events, World Economics and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to Poland, Imported Aliens, and Brexit

  1. hillrj says:

    Dear EM: this looks interesting, but I dont have time to look/listen to a 15 minute video. (There are many others) You have graciously abstracted this one into text, thanks. But are you aware of any tool that lets you convert a video into text so that it can be speed-read?

  2. TinyCO2 says:

    The video talks about ‘feminised’ policy but that’s a failure to understand humans or history. Look back at the historic tug of war between the church and the state. Between Communism and Capitalism. Between just about every instance of left wing versus rightwing. Almost every key player is a man. In the video it tries to say that the upkeep of war memorials are a feminised thing, while using the rape of women to condemn it. Whether those rapists could rape or not, it wasn’t any feminine instinct to attack women, it was old fashioned masculinity.

    Look to the disastrous policies of the EU and find many a man up to his neck in them. They are the priesthood of bureaucracy. They talk about peace and prosperity but they are prepared to sacrifice many a peasant to get it. Allowing in all those migrants was a multifaceted mistake, based on both altruism (albeit superficial) and greed. They can see an aging continent with a declining workforce. Not only did they indulge in the Ponzi scheme of thinking that they can keep stuffing people in at the bottom to serve the top, they thought that one peasant is pretty much like any other. We could blame Germany’s current crisis on Mrs Merkel but by and large Germany is very successful. I’d certainly rather be in her feminised country than a great many other who aren’t.

    Europe (and other western countries) have been taming their populations for centuries, if not millennia. And by and large it’s not a bad thing. We enjoy the fruits of cooperation. Capitalism or right wing thinking or just plain masculinity is a good balance for that ‘feminisation’ because our ingenuity is often tied up with our self interest and ego. Why would people go beyond the minimum, if there was no reward? Equally if the self interest gets out of control, then people suffer and eventually revolt. Each country is trying to find the perfect balance but no two are the same, because no two countries have the same personality. The south of Europe has a higher number of ‘masculinised’ people but at the same time they’re a bit lazy and a bit crooked. The far north are more hard working and better at caring and sharing. The UK, France and Germany are somewhere in the middle. The EU tries to merge them altogether under one set of rules and the tighter the sack gets, the harder the ferrets fight. The US manages so far, by having a lot less rules from the Presidency and a lot more state wide freedom to choose their own path. The EU leaders however continue their ‘ever closer union’ because they want the ultimate power spot over a single nation that would rival the US, Russia and China. Very masculine.

    Part of that plan to get control is the Euro. The unified currency is a boon and a bane for large populations. There are US states that could benefit from devaluation of their currency in the same way the southern EU countries would, but look to Trump instead to try and redistribute the success of the (largely Democrat) states. In the same way the counties and countries of the UK want a bigger slice of London’s income. I’ll be honest, I don’t know where the balance should be. Poland wants to benefit from the subsidies and market place of the EU but doesn’t like following the rules. Whether the EU adapts, whether Poland complies or whether the EU fractures is a good question that nobody knows the answers to.

    I’ll be honest, I didn’t want a referendum when it was called. I wanted to wait another 5-10 years to see if the EU would have to give up its ambitions of a super state. But having called it, I knew that we’d never get another. In many ways the changes that the EU might agree to are only now possible because we voted out. If the EU decided to drop its core principles for a looser arrangement, I’m not sure how I would vote should there be another referendum.

    So is Germany at risk? Not at the moment. It’s rich enough and prominent enough in the EU elite to write their own rules. I doubt we’d be leaving, if the EU was jumping to our tune. But ultimately the EU is controlled by a liberal elite. They make rules that sound good in their heads but they’re too remote from the edges to see the damage they do. Their solution so far has been to throw money at the dissenters. Now they’re trying threats but like those of the Remoaners, eventually you have to deliver on the threat or back off. Or both. The EU wants to punish the UK because it doesn’t want other countries to choose self determination over EU control. Should we drop out with no deal however the damage to the EU both nationally and at its head, might be a fatal blow. The EU could quite quickly run out of money to offer anyone incentives.

    One of the reasons I want out of the EU is because it is too ‘feminised’ or to use a better phrase ‘institutionalised’. Its only way to solve problems is to bolt on more regulation and we’re already at the point where we need to pare back, not build up. We need our youth to toughen up and not live like perpetual children. It might be a bit brutal to start standing on our own feet but it will get harder as time progresses. I’m not sure how long it will be before they agree with me.

  3. TinyCO2 says:

    I should add:

    The migrants are not remotely feminised and that is a large part of why they are a problem.

  4. H.R. says:

    TinyCO2: “There are US states that could benefit from devaluation of their currency in the same way the southern EU countries would, but look to Trump instead to try and redistribute the success of the (largely Democrat) states. [emphasis mine]

    Your perspective is interesting and thought provoking to this native American, TinyCO2. I just wanted to point out that the “(largely Democrat) states” are dead broke and in debt up to their eyeballs, California and Illinois being the prime examples. They have run out of other peoples money long ago and their credit cards are close to being maxed out.

    Also, States here in America cannot devaluate their currency as they have no currency separate from the U.S. dollar. Their only option is to default on their massive debt and renege on the promises underlying their even more massive unfunded obligations.

  5. TinyCO2 says:

    Whether the states are poor has no reflection of the value of the businesses there anymore. Like the UK, the big businesses are very good at moving their taxable income away from the tax man. Specifically the internet companies. Whereas farmers and maufacturers are easier to pin down. Those groups suffer because China and other poor or formerly poor countries can produce certain things much cheaper. Only the trade barriers that Trump is putting in place can stop the slide in prosperity in traditional state economies like the steel industry. The US is probably big enough to do that but it is essentially the same practices that are protectionist in the EU. The true, sink or swim capitalism would be to let people buy from where they like, no government tax on top to protect US interests.

    What many suggest that Greece or Italy should be able to do is devalue their currency so that people will still feel as wealthy when buying in house and that their products look more inviting to outsiders. The basis of our boom, post Brexit vote. Of course those in the Euro and the Dollar can’t do that unless the richer states/countries agree.

    I can’t tell which system is best.

  6. Ian W says:

    @TinyCO2 – I think you misunderstand Trump’s tactics. He does not want tariffs. Indeed he told the G-7 that he wanted zero tariffs, but he was not going to sit by and have everyone else put tariffs on US goods while US put no tariffs on imports. Nor was he going to sit by while dumping was used to kill off US industry. (China successfully killed of the US ‘rare earth’ mining by doing just that) So if the world wants tariffs the US will have them too – extra super size. In background negotiations that is what Trump is achieving tariffs being very low or none. He is a negotiator not a politician. So what is being asked for he often knows is unreasonable and some are just strawmen. The peanut gallery (so called for their cranial capacity) do not understand this approach, which is winning.

  7. E.M.Smith says:


    I don’t know of any, but a quick web search showed a couple to explore:


    Yeah, that’s one of his “themes” that gets pushed even harder in some other of his videos; that the “feminization” of a culture leads to its downfall. While in this video he sort of assumes it, in the others he defends it more. With some interesting data to back it up, such as younger women voting in large numbers for more welfare and government control policies.

    Yes, men are involved in lots of those processes and caused much of the grief; but they were in many case not the Macho Man type but the cerebral thinker type and the administrative manipulative type.

    Does that “prove his point”? I’m ambiguous on that. He has some validity in the different preferences of men and women for more government and more “someone else care for me” policies. Clearly the “self reliant man” type matters to building a culture of self reliance. But that isn’t enough for me to ascribe things as he does. More ponder needed on that point, for me.

    Per richer States being the Democratic ones:

    Not really.

    California was largely a conservative State during the bulk of its development and growth. It didn’t start going downhill until about the 1980’s when a strong Democratic push tipped us over the edge. Prior to that it was more a balance oscillating between the two poles (and in the ’50s to ’60s the Democrats were more like modern Republicans anyway). Similarly, New York was a very business oriented government until fairly recently (in historical terms of ‘recent’). Now, with Bloomberg, it’s full on fruitcake left.

    Now for the counter point, would you call Florida (one of the fastest growing) and Texas left wing, or more conservative? Places with the most business friendly policies, and that includes a lower tax burden and less “welfare state” are the fastest growing Now compare Detroit. Could not go for a “currency devaluation” to pay for all their overgrown Democrat advocated taxes and programs, so the industry and people had to move instead. New car makers moving into states “down south” with more Republican friendly laws and taxes.

    It takes a generation to build a State Economy and a generation for it to decay into rubble. Despite a couple of successful mega-corps (Google, Ebay, Apple…) in Silicon Valley and a big influx of foreign money buying California real estate; I’d not call the present economy a vibrant one. In the ’80s and even into the ’90s there was a large and vibrant start-up culture and lots of business formations. Now that same area (where I ‘found work’ for 30 years fairly easily) is turning into things like dentist offices, coffee shops, and other support / consumption functions. Along with a LOT of empty buildings… In short, the seed capital and future growth has left for elsewhere.

    Per Trump and China:

    That’s a very very long discussion. The net-net of it is that only in a free and FAIR market can normal market dynamics lead to classical capitalism optimizing. The trade with China is dominated by Mercantilism and even worse non-capitalist manipulations. (Want to set up operations in China? Be prepared to hand over a controlling interest and ALL your intellectual property to a Chinese “partner”…) It is most certainly NOT an example of Capitalism in any way shape or form.

    As to which system is better:

    We have existence proofs. The unbridled pure capitalism grows very fast, but at too high a cost for the “little man”. You get the Standard Oil and J.P. Morgan problem of “fattest wallet wins” and everyone else loses. Communism and Central Authority Socialism tries to fix this by having The State be the Fattest Wallet. That works well for a little while (see the rapid economic development of Russia under Stalin) but with no better long term result for the little people (how many Millions dead, eh?). The simple fact is that Greedy Evil Bastards rise to the top of either corporations or The State. In Regulated Capitalism you can keep them fighting each other via competition in industries, allowing no more concentration than an Oligopoly. Under Central Authority Socialism & Communism, this doesn’t happen and The State eventually becomes a repressive agency and fails (see the USSR, Mao’s China, Pol Pot, Maduro in Venezuela, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc…)

    So we know what does not work, and we know what works.

    The challenge facing the world today is that the GEB Leaders Of Industry and the GEBs running Nations have formed cabals of mutual back scratching. Businesses are buying the laws they want (and certainly NOT competitive capitalism) while the Political Leaders are removing power from the people and into their own hands. This will eventually result in collapse, but for a few decades looks like success. This is the “3rd Way” System of Mussolini and Fascist Socialism. Works really really well ( lauded for the trains running on time and economic growth in Italy) right up until it collapses in dictatorship and war…

    Until one can find a way to prevent the rise of GEBs to take over a Central Authority, all Central Authority systems are subject to the same mode of failure. The EU will be no different.

  8. philjourdan says:

    I just wanted to point out that the “(largely Democrat) states” are dead broke and in debt up to their eyeballs, California and Illinois being the prime examples. They have run out of other peoples money long ago and their credit cards are close to being maxed out.

    Both Tiny and HR are correct and for the same reason, although they are not seeing the forest for the trees. The “growth” of the democrat states was not accomplished under their current government. But under less repressive ones. They are now living on past accomplishments. They grew so well, that the left came in and decided to make sure to “spread” the wealth around. But they did so from the perspective of the income earned in the past, not what is being earned today. They basically spent their savings and since it is very hard to stop spending once you start, they could not stop when the cost exceeded their ability to pay for it. So they are dead broke.

    They were not dead broke when it started. But then Reagan was governor of California back in the 60s as well. But they are broke now. Just as the European countries are – and pretty much for the same reason – they ate their seed corn.

  9. philjourdan says:

    Damn EM! was writing the same thing (single point for me) at the same time you were! I am honored that I think like you in some areas! :-)

  10. E.M.Smith says:


    You were much more succinct about it… I rambled a bit too much in comparison ;-)

    I would expect rational minds looking at the same data to come to the same conclusions. Like my having “invented” a few hundred things only to discover someone else invented them before me. That whole notion of “when the time is ripe the invention will be made”. Gray vs. Bell in the telephone. Then many others.

    Prior to Reagan, we had Edmund G. “Pat” Brown. His signature accomplishment was to build infrastructure for water all over the State and enable the rapid growth of the L.A. basin and San Francisco Bay Area. Were it not for that infrastructure, California would be topped out at about 1/2 to 1/4 the present population and agriculture would be far far less than now.

    In many ways, California is a product of that “mining of the water” of the State. Democratic welfare and immigration policies not so much… Taxes not at all. Since that time, sales taxes have doubled, gasoline and related taxes have risen, and income taxes have shot up too. We had a Citizen Revolt against skyrocketing property taxes via Prop. 13 (and the refusal of the periodic attempts to repeal it).

    Does it matter if investment in infrastructure and physical capital stock are done by a Communist (Stalin), a Socialist, a “3rd Way” Socialist / Fascist ( Hitler, Mussolini), a Capitalist ( Morgan, Chase, Rockerfeller, Buffet) or even the various Kings and Emperors of Europe? Not really. The profit gets distributed to different people and the winners and losers change, but the net economic benefit of a large capital investment persists. Some systems squander it more with other inefficiencies in their economy (see Venezuela today as they squander the investment in oil production done in earlier times – largest oil deposits in the world and they can’t produce it due to decay of physical plant and stock). But in the end, as long as the structures are built to improve production there is more production to be used.

    Where economic systems vary is in the question of “Who gets the money / profit?” and “How stable are they against decay into Dictatorship?” (Of various kinds, be it King, Emperor, Dictator, Dear Leader, The Peoples Committee, …) The rest is details, really.

  11. TinyCO2 says:

    What I’m trying to say is that we already live in a highly feminised society (some call it civilisation ). We are already sheltered from much of raw nature. Nature that includes our own impulses. Countries where many migrants come from are much closer to our societal roots where might is right. We fear that they bring their attitudes with them. You may be surprised how long our current human rights have been developing but they come from a sense of what is fair, not what is possible if you have the upper hand.

    Can you say where masculine decency turns into feminised parasitism? That’s essentially how that video guy sees socialism but he takes the existing civilisation of his society for granted. I agree that too much is bad for society. I’m not sure where the balance lies. I suspect that the answer varies from country to country and even decade to decade. People are an essential variable in the equation.

    Women vote for more social support because they need more. In an ideal world everyone would be able and willing to meet their obligations but….

  12. E.M.Smith says:

    “Can you say where masculine decency turns into feminised parasitism? ”

    Yes. Just about 1955 to 1960. That was the start of the turn too far.

  13. TinyCO2 says:

    I wasn’t alive at that point so I can’t agree or disagree.

  14. Sandy MCCLINTOCK says:

    FYI this is part of an escalating problem
    Gang of youths out of control in Taylors Hill, Melbourne

    Link (Subscription?)

    36 MINUTES AGO AUGUST 9, 2018
    Victoria Police have defended not arresting any of the dozens of youths of African appearance who set upon officers last, hurled rocks at their cars and smashing a windscreen, saying it was a short term tactical decision.

    Police ordered people in ­Bronte Way, Taylors Hill, in Melbourne’s west, to lock their doors as they tried to gain control of a group that had gathered at about 7pm in a nearby park.

    Projectiles, believed to be rocks, were hurled at officers and a police car was damaged before heavily armed specialist officers were called in.

  15. E.M.Smith says:

    “Not arrested” means “trained that they are immune” and “encouraged to do more next time”…

    ANY gang on a rampage needs to be halted and bound up on the spot our you will just encourage more. Adrenaline is a powerful and addictive drug, if you do not offset it with enough pain, it will be sought out in larger degree next time.

    I know this as I’ve jumped from airplanes, ridden motorcycles too fast, and jumped off a bridge for about a 70 foot plunge into water… Yes, “adrenaline junky” is a real thing.

  16. Larry Ledwick says:

    EM your comment triggered a thought – I wonder how many hard left liberals have dogs?

    Anyone who has trained a dog understands your comment at an intuitive level. Not punishing is almost as much of a positive reinforcement as giving a reward.

    All it trains them to do is test the limits to find out where the line will be drawn.

    While composing this comment I decided to do a quick search and it appears that others have confirmed my suspicions. Liberals generally are cat people and conservatives are generally dog people. (part of that of course is urban vs rural as cats turn into coyote food in really rural country if they don’t have a protective family dog around too.)


    Antia’s mascot should be a cat that knocks things off the shelf just to get attention.

  17. Power Grab says:

    I keep wondering . . . who told all those 3rd world guys they should move north in droves? The EU “masters” or their own imams?

    I also keep wondering . . . is the invasion of Europe just someone’s idea of invoking the “economy of the broken window”?

    In other words, let’s not encourage an increase in spending for durable stuff that will last generations, and that the workers could point to with pride at having helped to create. We don’t need any more bridges or cathedrals or dams or superhighways or trains.

    Rather, encourage people to build expensive, stupid things like wind turbines that are useless when the wind dies down. At worst, they could explode and throw huge shrapnel in all directions and set off fires! And solar generators that are useless at least half of every day. Oh, and let’s buy rare earths from China to create huge batteries to store the intermittent energy these sources cost so much to produce. SMH!

    Even better, let’s bring in hoodlums who will break stuff and ravish our women and children so people will be scared. Scared people spend more than content people, right?

  18. Sandy MCCLINTOCK says:

    EM: “ANY gang on a rampage needs to be halted and bound up…”
    Yup ;) Same also applies to home-invasion etc.
    A Christian Kenyan friend visited me in Australia about 2010. We discussed immigration and he asked about the influx of mainly Sudanese migrants into Melbourne. His words … “I think you will see this influx as a regrettable mistake. … It has not worked for us in Nairobi”.
    Kenya is mainly Christian but Sudan is mainly Muslim and he was referring to the clashes that can happen: two years later, in 2013 the “Westgate shopping mall attack” happened with ~200 deaths.
    The Muslims that I met in Kenya during a 3 year contract, were kind and friendly.
    However the breakdown of law and order in places like Somalia leads to a very different outlook on the value of human life.
    I wonder what tools the Department of Immigration has to assess someone’s outlook when deciding to grant permission to come here?

  19. Larry Ledwick says:

    If you go back and re-read the Club or Rome sponsored “The Limits to growth”

    They predicted mass migration out of Africa as part of the end state collapse due to the loss of resources and later this was also predicted as a natural outcome of global warming and the population bomb. The uncontrolled birth rate in Africa and the sudden turn down in infant mortality due to modern medicine are also partly to blame as they create unrelenting pressure to push out to greener pastures. If they had a thriving local economy and stable governments people would settle down and try to become successful and the birthrate would naturally fall to near replacement.

    They have been working on setting up these conditions for decades (since 1972), someone is buying lots of rubber boats in north Africa – who do you think is writing the checks for those boats?

  20. Rhoda Klapp says:

    Cats and Dogs? Left and Right? Dogs can be trained to behave as required. You can postulate attaining the perfect dog, the dog who will always behave correctly. That is what socialism and communism require in their society. As long as all people act correctly a socialist society will work fine. On the right we believe in a set of rules which expect imperection in our citizens but get on with it in a practical manner. You can’t perfect a cat in terms of its behavior, but you can live with it in a compromise setup.

  21. Simon Derricutt says:

    Cats are the best argument that the Earth is round rather than flat. If the Earth was flat, then by now the cats would have knocked everything off the edge.

    Germany saw a demographic time-bomb with not enough young people to supply the workers needed in future, and that the old people would need carers in larger numbers. Obviously they thought that peons were replaceable items and that their culture didn’t matter, so importing millions of Muslim immigrants would fix the perceived problem. Maybe because the politicians are not technical people, they didn’t realise that automation and robots will mean that the problem would resolve itself if they didn’t meddle.

    I can’t blame the immigrants for trying to improve their lives – it ought to be expected. The countries are getting better medicine, so far more children are surviving than the culture is set up for, and so they have too many people for the farming they are using. That also means they need more teachers and need to add more houses and infrastructure and…. Population pressure is bound to lead to wars over resources and migration to places that currently have more resources.

    Maybe the underlying problem is the idea of centralised control, where one problem is seen by the controllers and thus things are set in place to fix that problem alone, but not the problems that result from that fix or the other problems that need to be fixed at the same time. Not enough bandwidth in the decision-making process.

  22. H.R. says:

    Simon Derricutt: “Not enough bandwidth in the decision-making process.”

    Excellent! Perfect description of most government ‘solutions’ to problems.

    The rest of the time, the solutions are designed to perpetuate a problem so the the politician can continue to run on the promise of solving it, or the bad solutions create opportunities for profit.

    P.S. What’s with all the ‘fighting’ in politics? Politicians all run on ‘fighting’ for or against this or that, and they are always ‘fighting’ for ‘you.’

    I have not seen one black eye, broken nose ft lip, or a single cheek reddened by the smack of a gauntlet. Now back in the 1800s, the pols would occasionally cane each other or shoot/get shot in a duel. Those old boys did know how to fight for something. The pols are going to have to come up with something new.

    Maybe the campaign ads nowadays should say, “Re-elect Senator Snort. Dithering, waffling, voting his own wallet, and spouting gibberish for YOU.”

  23. philjourdan says:

    “Cats are the best argument that the Earth is round rather than flat. If the Earth was flat, then by now the cats would have knocked everything off the edge. “

    @ Simon – LOL! As a cat person, that is very true!

  24. cdquarles says:

    Dogs? Nay, having children would be enough to make EM’s point; and toddlers are really good at it.

Comments are closed.