The victory in the Indian elections of Modi's Hindu nationalist right wing party is another reminder that, strange as it may seem to consumers of the American press, conservative nationalism is the leading political trend of the 2010s. The DC/NYC globalist view, which has been become even more dominant now that the Commander-in-Chief is Barack Obama, is that there aren't really any independent countries out there, just rebellious provinces. *
The important thing is for nationalists to not squabble with each other across borders, like the unfortunate events of 100 years ago.
----------------
* Lifted from the comments of a couple of months ago.
----------------
* Lifted from the comments of a couple of months ago.
Posts
29 comments:
In a place like Newark, I would bet on real estate developers. Gentrification is slower than white flight, but is powerful and unrelenting.
It took a while, but Cabrini Green is gone. In fact, most of the CHA is gone.
Hey, isn't the UK's all important elections tomorrow? Wonder how good are the UKIP's chances?
Barack Hussein Obama, President of Earth, will have to crack down on this atavistic return to 20th century primitivism.
Sorry, sometimes I imagine I'm living in a dystopian sci-fi novel. I try and fight it but the daily news feed just keeps dragging me back.
Indians are seeing the light and are running away from darkness.
Literally.
Indians were scared by Barack Obama and his alliance with Negros/Blacks/Africans so they are rejecting that sick ideology.
They don't want their continent already infested with turmoil to turn into Africa and become even blacker/darker.
Steve, sometime you say things better than anybody else possibly could. Therefore:
A Steve Sailer quibcag that pretty much sums up American foreign policy.
The important thing is for nationalists to not squabble with each other across borders, like the unfortunate events of 100 years ago.
Note that those squabbling nations 100 years ago were major global empires.
The DC/NYC globalist view, which has been become even more dominant now that the Commander-in-Chief is Barack Obama, is that there aren't really any independent countries out there, just rebellious provinces.
What about Israel and the AIPAC-Americans?
"Yes, Master."
The Wall Street Journal identified Modi as the pro-capitalist, pro-foreign-investment candidate, gave the distinct impression that these were the decisive issues in the campaign, and barely mentioned the Hindu nationalist aspect in passing. The NYC/DC consensus is oblivious to the really important trends in the world, seeing everything through the prism of their own preposterously narrow, parochial concerns that nobody in the world, other than the decadent elites in the US and Europe, cares about.
"There aren't really any independent countries out there, just rebellious provinces."
Wow, that's good.
I'm a fan of both British Conservatives and UKIP on Facebook, and, needless to say, Conservatives are utterly frightened of what will happen in the EU elections this week.
A big UKIP victory would put major pressure on the coalition government to deliver on lower immigration and greater (or complete) independence from the EU.
Modi's election may be the first big blowback to the LGBT-cathedral-human rights mafia in the US state department. They banned him from entry into the US for some pretty major religious rioting he hadn't controlled when he had been governor of his small state back in 2002. Now he has become prime minister, and the snub from America still rankles.
The last government that was run by Modi's party was extraordinarily pro-American - this one will probably be much less so. Which is strange because pro-Israeli, pro-American policies used to be a hallmark of his party (since both countries were viewed as allies against islamic extremism).
Most world leaders of major countries seem generally indifferent towards foreign countries, and work pragmatically with them. But Modi is one of those grudge-bearing, hatred-nursing types who cannot stand insults to their ego. I wouldn't be surprised if he forgoes all visits to the UN general assembly just to avoid setting foot in America.
Bet big on Black dysfunction. What's the real estate average price in Detroit, Baltimore, Gary, and Newark? Soon to be joined by NYC and Chicago.
Its a Nationalist thing. Black nationalsm but nationalism all the same.
Interesting, too, that the Gandhi-Nehru dynasty got its head handed to it. Regression to the mean personified by its scion, Rahul.
By the way, Russia is not one of those rebellious provinces. Putin is in good standing with the globalists.
Apparently, he meets regularly with Kissinger. Wonder what that's about.
That the nationalist tide is occurring 6 years into the still ongoing worst crisis of capitalism since the great depression, is the best part. From Tony Abbott to Shinzo Abe to Modi to Marine Le Pen, the nationalist right have stunningly captured the initiative from the Left which squandered a historical opportunity. Glorious.
Modi got elected because the Indian economy has been steadily going down the drain for the past few years. The incumbent Congress party made no attempts to check rampant corruption, nor did it bother to fix the appalling condition of the country's infrastructure. Instead, they tried to buy votes from the poor (still the single largest constituency in India) by offering handouts that had the effect of worsening the economic situation.
The Hindu nationalism hardly figured in Modi's campaign, apart from a few token pledges made in the party's platform; not very different from the permanent "pro-life" pledge the Republicans keep making in their platform just before elections.
As Bill Clinton (or was it James Carville) said, "It's the economy, stupid!"
@hardly
But Modi is one of those grudge-bearing, hatred-nursing types who cannot stand insults to their ego. I wouldn't be surprised if he forgoes all visits to the UN general assembly just to avoid setting foot in America.
In India, Modi has the reputation of bending people to his will. Makes the liberals claim he is a fascist.
It's very likely he'll not step on American soil as long as Obama is President. He definitely will (or will try to) after 2016, especially if the new President is a Republican.
Chubby Ape wrote: sometimes I imagine I'm living in a dystopian sci-fi novel
So do I...
hardly said - I wouldn't be surprised if he forgoes all visits to the UN general assembly just to avoid setting foot in America.
-
Yes, I expect that
Modi made a fake sex DVD of one of his rivals within BJP and got it circulated.
Modi comes from a backward caste and more willing to get his hands dirty
Much of Modi's popularity is the widespread ( but unproven ) belief that he organised the anti-muslim riots after Muslims burned a Hindu train. Since then muslims have been tame in Gujurat and this has made him popular as the man who fixed the muslims for good
Some of his methods of taming islamists is to arrest the entire family of islamic terrorists.
His visa got denied due to Xtian evangelicals led by Condi. He is personally a very vengeful guy and he is a close friend of Netanyahu, Abe and Putin
In some ways he can be compared to the very tough Indira Gandhi
"there aren't really any independent countries out there, just rebellious provinces"
That reminds me of the idea of Empire my late friend John Reilly used frequently. In principle, the Empire has no outside, everything is within its jurisdiction. The Empire may choose to allow subsidiary states to exist at its sufferance, however.
Lot of interesting views here on Modi.
To cut a long story short, India has its own version of the hyper-left wing ultra-liberal liberals and they have taken an absolute pasting. Also, Modi was denied a US visa and has been treated with contempt until the goofballs in the US Government realized that this was going to blow up in their face. They tried to do a U-turn but it became blatantly obvious.
Modi has already started making very favourable pro-Putin and pro-Russian statements. This BJP government will NOT be pro-American. Obama and his cronies are looking like clowns now. Obama called Modi personally to congratulate Modi (and invited him to Washington) and Kerry kept repeating platitudes about how "vital" Indo-US relations are but they had no effect. Modi did not refer to these in his tweets for two days and until he had acknowledged twenty other world leaders (including the New Zealand Prime Minister).
At heart, Modi is a product of the RSS, which is about as far removed from American liberalism as one can get. People should not be fooled by Modi's campaign rhetoric on the economy to assume that the "social" issues do not matter to him or his party members. At heart, his is a hard right nationalistic party and nothing in the economy is going to change it any time soon.
there aren't really any independent countries out there, just rebellious provinces
I'm quite sure this is a moldbugism.
Modi has already started making very favourable pro-Putin and pro-Russian statements. This BJP government will NOT be pro-American.
Being cozy with Russia is not incompatible with having friendly relations with Washington, at least for an Indian Prime Minister. India was always heavily dependent on the former USSR for its arms needs, and that dependency has been maintained with the current Russian state. I read that India imported 70% of its military technology from Russia (though Israel is #2).
A lot of people on this message board are overstating Modi's grudge with the USA. Some of his most prominent supporters (and I would not be surprised if they were funding him too) have been Indian Americans, almost all of whom would be categorized as Wall Street Republicans. They promoted him as an economically right-wing, small government conservative. One of Modi's campaign slogans was "Maximum governance with minimum government", which is music to Republcans' ears. Even when Modi was banned from entering the US, the few members of Congress who supported the uplifting of the ban, and who met Modi in India, were conservative Republicans.
I think Modi and Obama are going to have a cold relationship, but he is going to try and cultivate excellent relations with the American right (who are probably likely to come to power in 2016.)
Also, he is not going to push a hard right agenda on social issues, because most of the people who voted for him did so for his economic reform agenda, and would likely have not voted for him if he had emphasized the Hindu nationalist stuff. He'll lose good will very very fast if he goes in that direction (recall how quickly Bush lost credibility after he tried to push Social Security reform in 2005.)
"the nationalist right have stunningly captured the initiative from the Left which squandered a historical opportunity"
That's because the modern "Left" is a wholly owned (though deniable and arms-length) subsidiary of globalised capital. Their main - indeed only - function is to give a hard time to immigration restrictionists.
But although their cultural and education hegemony is so dominant, "More Immigration Now" tends not to appeal to the working (or non-working) classes.
I heard Modi is interested in getting Japan to build a bullet train in India.
A bullet train, not toilets or a sewage system or a garbage collection system.
Modi was denied visa by Evangelical Xtians, who used the fake excuse of anti-muslim riots.
The real reason was that BJP passed anti-conversion laws to investigate each conversion for fraud or bribery. Lots of xtian evangelists got jailed for 3 years by BJP. Modi was one of the most vigorous enforcer of these laws. These laws will be reintroduced.
House resolution 417, which is anti-Modi is sponsored by Pitts, a conservative xtian Republican and has 51 sponsors.
Modi will be very friendly to US businessmen and Pentagon. He will be very hostile to all those who insulted him such as Harvard, U-Penn Wharton School, Human rights types.
Pro-business Republicans will be welcomed, Christian Right Republicans will be shunned as well as the 51 idiots who sponsored HR417
http://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-resolution/417/cosponsors
has 26 republicans and 25 democrats
Summary: H.Res.417 — 113th Congress (2013-2014)
There is one summary for this bill. Bill summaries are authored by CRS.
Shown Here:
Introduced in House (11/18/2013)
Recognizes the suffering of Indian citizens who have been victims of religious violence.
Calls for religious freedom and related human rights to be included in the United States-India Strategic Dialogue and for such issues to be raised directly with federal and state Indian government officials.
Declares that the House of Representatives shares the opinion of the Department of State and the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom that the Gujarat government has not adequately pursued justice for the victims of religious violence in 2002 and expresses concern regarding reports about the complicity of local officials.
Commends the U.S. government for exercising its authority in 2005 under the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 to deny a U.S. visa to Narendra Modi on the grounds of religious freedom violations, and encourages it to review the applications of any individuals implicated in such violations under the same standard.
Commends the role of India's National Human Rights Commission and the Indian Supreme Court, which has led to some convictions in Gujarat riot cases and the arrest of high-level leaders in the Gujarati administration.
Calls on India to: (1) increase training on human rights and religious freedom standards and practices for police and the judiciary; and (2) empower the National Commission on Minorities with enforcement mechanisms.
Calls on Gujarat and other Indian states with anti-conversion laws to repeal such legislation and ensure freedom to practice, propagate, and profess religion as enshrined in the Indian constitution.
Encourages the establishment of an impartial body of interfaith religious leaders, human rights advocates, legal experts, and government officials to discuss and recommend actions to promote religious tolerance and understanding.
Urges all political parties and religious organizations to publicly oppose the exploitation of religious differences and denounce harassment and violence against religious minorities.
But once in power, it will be blamed for all that go wrong.
Post a Comment