Click to Subscribe
▶  More from Gaming Radio Free Dindustan
'Our Stupidity'
Jihad Update with Jeremy Bentham


Jeremy, I'm so fascinated with the implications here I'm publishing this under what is essentially our Game Theory page, since I never did design those games I was working on and our current world disorder is simply so fascinating. My questions to you and our readers are below your commentary.

-James

Top Bishop Says "Europe Will Soon Be Muslim Because of Our Stupidity"

Eventually Europeans will get fed up with the Muslim migrants demands and criminal misbehavior as well as with the idiocy and oppression of their own governments. Then bloody civil war will break out. It’s just a matter of time.

-Jeremy

I must agree up to that point, Jeremy. However, there is the third player, the State. Since the State has invited and favored the invader, which side would the police and military take in such a civil war? Will the State reverse course to align with natives, or will it stay the course in replacing them? I'm curious as to your thoughts on what Western states will align with invaders and which states might abide by their social contract. In a place like the U.S. do we get regional breakup—maybe a red district-blue district fragmentation with big city police and feds siding with rioters and rural police siding with citizens? How would the military split? Obviously contractors and alphabet soup agencies would side with the invaders. But would guard, reserve and recalled divisions really side with the feds and the invaders or would they side with the citizens and the president? With this question, on America, I'm wondering what happens if Trump gets assassinated and Pence faces an intelligence agency coup. Or if Trump survives an attempt on his life and cracks down, what then?

-James

“The wars of the People are more terrible than the wars of the Princes.”

– Frederick the Great

““We help without delay those coming from outside and we forget many poor and old Italians who are eating from the trash,” the archbishop said. “We need policies that take care of Italians first: our young people and the unemployed. I am a protester. If I were not a priest, I’d be out there demonstrating in the squares. What is the point of so many migrants that instead of thanking for the food we give them, they just throw it, spend hours with their cell phones and even organise riots?” He even criticised the Catholic Church for giving money to migrants. “Giving money to migrants wandering around town is not only wrong, but morally harmful because we encourage their behaviour and they get used to that, not mentioning the fact that we already feed them. “I think sometimes this creates a beggars’ network. I remember that my father went to work very hard as a migrant in Australia so I could go to seminary. So he has experienced in his own skin the discomfort of poverty and the noble virtue of gratitude.”

In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, we command you, brothers and sisters, to keep away from every believer who is idle and disruptive and does not live according to the teachings you received from us. For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example. We were not idle when we were with you, nor did we eat anyone’s food without paying for it. On the contrary, we worked night and day, laboring and toiling so that we would not be a burden to any of you. We did this, not because we do not have the right to such help, but in order to offer ourselves as a model for you to imitate. For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: “The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.” We hear that some among you are idle and disruptive. They are not busy; they are busybodies. Such people we command and urge in the Lord Jesus Christ to settle down and earn the food they eat. And as for you, brothers and sisters, never tire of doing what is good

-Romans 11:6-13 (NIV)

http://www.breitbart.com/faith/2017/01/14/top-bishop-europe-will-soon-muslim-stupidity/

Add Comment
Sam J.January 17, 2017 1:30 AM UTC

I've read Chittum's book and I'm not so sure I can see that happening here unless there's a total economic collapse, comet strike, solar EMP event or something like that. If it did happen Chittum thinks the Whites in the South would be wiped out. I really, really, really, REALLY seriously doubt that. There are areas in the Southern Black belt that Whites would have to leave they're so outnumbered but Blacks have little capability to organize very effectively. They would chew through all the food in their territory very fast and then start attacking Whites. They would fair well for maybe a couple of weeks when Whites would realize no one was coming to save them and even more important no one was coming to arrest them when they defended themselves. After that it would open hunting season on Blacks and they would be forced into a few enclaves in the Black belt. The rest in White areas would have a better than 50% chance of being driven into the enclaves with the rest of the Blacks. There the weak would be eaten by the stronger or more vicious and mean eaten as in consumed.

I think the split would be all races and Whites against the Blacks. I'm speaking in the South. Maybe Mexicans would make a stand alone a few places. Nobody really likes Blacks.
Jeremy BenthamJanuary 16, 2017 3:57 AM UTC

Good question James. This is a matter I have been pondering myself. Especially in regards to the USA. In most countries that are in danger of a civil war the political, social, ethnic and religious fault lines are pretty predictable. Like with Yugoslavia and the USSR. They both broke up on exactly the fault lines the experts predicted they would. What nobody was sure about was what would be the event that started the breakup. That caught people by surprise in both cases. The USA is a complex case because it is very unclear where the fault lines lie for a break up. It might even become a case of 'r' strategists versus 'K' strategists. I was in Bosnia in '97 so I got a chance to look at that case up close. The big lesson I learned is that anywhere from a third to half of the people in Bosnia were politically apathetic about the situation; however, once the shooting between the militant factions started there was no staying neutral and uninvolved. Then you had to pick a side or you were unprotected by everybody. It will be much the same here. In Yugoslavia the police and military split up exactly along ethnic/religious lines. Whatever you were, Serb, Croat, Bosniac, Slovene Macedonian or Montenegrin, that's whose side you fought for. Whatever weapons or equipment from the former Yugoslav military fell into your hands that's what you used. It's less clear how such a breakup would play out in the American military. I think Nero the Pict has it right that most of the people of color (POC) and the immigrants will be recruited into the "Blue"/ Good-white Forces. However the "Red" /bad-white forces are liable to have significant non-white contingents as well. People who are just as weary of the PC nonsense of the Good-whites as the Bad-whites are. Keep in mind that two thirds of the U.S. military voted for Trump and one-third voted for Hillary, so that gives us a rough estimate of how the military will split up. Likewise most rank and file policemen support the Second Amendment, whereas the police leadership, especially in the big cities where they are political appointees, does not. Again the gives us a rough estimate where the fault lines lie within law enforcement. The Federal LEO agencies are likely to be one third to one half Hillary supporters. The CIA is heavily infiltrated with Leftists now by all accounts. I believe that the event that will trigger the actual breakup/ civil war will be an economic collapse. It's hard to see how our 20 trillion dollars in national debt will have a good ending. There is bound to be some kind of extraordinarily unpleasant correction connected with that debt. Then there will be a fight for the resources that remain AND to decide who will run what parts of the country in the future. I had originally thought the Red states would be most likely to initiate the succession, but now with the election of Trump it appears even more likely that Blue states like California will start it. Anyway, this all requires further study. But I do think that the civil war fault lines in the USA will become more defined in the coming four years, after the Trump Administration becomes inaugurated and starts pursuing its political agenda in earnest. Then we will see who really supports who, and why.
PRJanuary 15, 2017 11:45 PM UTC

" I'm curious as to your thoughts on what Western states will align with invaders and which states might abide by their social contract. "

All states will side with the invaders as they've been doing since a couple of decades after WWII. Read the closing chapters of "The Rise and Decline of the State." "The State" is really "the bureaucrats operating the State organs." They see bureaucracy as an end in itself. Immigrants rely on the bureaucracy for handouts, schooling, and policing. Free citizens don't want either immigrants or bureaucracy but get both from the STate, and get them good and hard. Any taxes paid to the State are repaid in the form of further ethnic cleansing and the hiring of more bureaucrats. Therefore, States suffer from a crisis of legitimacy. Citizens who don't want to be ethnically cleansed by the state will need to set up their own governments or enclaves that somehow exclude the State and foreigners.
Nero The PictJanuary 15, 2017 11:07 AM UTC

James and Jeremy,

Ever read the book Civil War II by Thomas Chittum? Prescient in many ways, published about twenty years ago. He lays out a rough sketch of what will likely happen here in the US over the coming years. The Balkanization will continue as planned. As for the question of the military and police defending the ongoing wave of invaders to our fair shores all one has to do is look at the 1st civil war. The Union maintained numerical superiority by pressing into service the legion of prolific papist Micks that landed here...So there's that.

The Yugoslavian conflict of the 90's (or Lebanon in the 80's) also offers ample fodder for what would happen among those in the civilian and law enforcement sphere. Internecine murder among soldiers and fragging of officers was the flavor of the month and the "front line" not being clearly delineated.

Things could break down into an urban/rural clusterfuck (Good whites vs Bad whites)...However, to my minds eye that seems far too simplistic. Unfortunately it seems that there would be some sort of racial component to whatever blood bath will take place in the future. Once the atrocities get going people seem to always coalesce along these lines.

The European theater will indeed be interesting. The land of Jerry and Fritz will be most fascinating in a morbid way. It is not entirely impossible to believe that the Eastern and Western portions of the country might fracture yet again. The irony being that the East will represent something approaching that lie they call "freedom". East Germany never got all of the PC BS that the Western half had shoved on them. The economy is also much worse there which tends to make people want invasion even less.

Maybe Germany will break up into regional principalities again (ie Saxony, Bavaria etc..) with a few new ones to add like Saladinia and Al-Bashry.