4 teenage boys raped and murdered a teenage girl. All of them were caught and jailed.
Japanese society heavily condemned the incident and was worried that America's culture of violent crime was affecting them that they even called it 'America disease'
And yet,
communists make up lies and claimed that : "200 men raped the girl and murdered her and got away with it and no one cared"
These lying communists also happened to write the narratives of ww2. Keep that in mind.
It's so rare in Japan that I know exactly what case you mean. The girl encased in concrete. And that happened in 1988. Shit probably happens a dozen times a year in the US.
These lying communists also happened to write the narratives of ww2.
WW2 narratives are lies? I guess the Germans were responsible for the Katyn massacre after all, because the lying communists who wrote the narratives say it was the Soviets.
How were they massively fucked up? The US locked American japs up in labor camps in the mountains after stealing all their property. Then dropped atom and firebombs all over their cities. Dropped firebombs and starved the Germans out. Then released feral nigger units on them to rape and pillage.
Don't really think anybody did anything worse than that. Maybe equally as so but war is war. If you'll excuse those acts of war what did the Germans or japs do that was worse?
Unit 731 and the fact the SS were so bad the German army despised them and right at the end allied with the Americans to fight them over a castle.
If we're just talking about killcount then yeah all as bad as each other but the methodology of how they killed, Nazis and Japanese kinda worse on that front..
All the Axis countries were strongly anti communist (and it wasn't just Japan and Germany). Meanwhile what were the Allies made out of? meanwhile who were the leaders of the Allied forces? USSR a literal communist dictatorship and a leftist American president.
And people wonder why the world is controlled by leftists now after they won ww2
A lot of actual actions against the SS happened towards the end when basically the army knew if they surrendered to the west they'd be fine, the SS dig in because EVERYONE knew the shit that they did.
Ya same shit the west did. Mass starvation in India, experimented on our own population with shit like syphilis. Comfort women? Aka war brides. Sounds the same.
The USSR was committing atrocities before and after World War II, and in fact, fear of communism was what led to the rise of Nazism to begin with. The whole 20th century was a disaster.
It was perfectly legitimate to view the Nazis as less bad than communists as of 1933. That said, those who view the Nazis positively as of 2024 are retards, because they failed even on their own terms.
Not quite, both were the fault of Germany's decision to launch a war of aggression against France in 1914. The tsar had already fallen by the time Wilson took the US into war, but the continuaton of the war then led to the fall of the Provisional Government.
The decision to remove the monarchy in Germany was also a disastrous one.
Oh I don't mean stopping the war, I mean ending it early. Wilson is the one that delayed American troops joining till they eventually did. By this time Russia had withdrawn from the war so Germany could move it's Eastern forces to reinforce the Western flank to combat the newly arriving Americans.
If they had been sent earlier (which is what Teddy wanted), Germany wouldn't have the forces to spare to reinforce, the western flank would've folded and Germany would have lost the war while Russia was under the provincial government meaning the Soviets would have never risen and in the treaty talks after, Wilson wouldn't have been invited to expel the virtues of interventionalism.
Oh I don't mean stopping the war, I mean ending it early. Wilson is the one that delayed American troops joining till they eventually did.
You're European, right? It shows, because most Americans who despise Wilson do so because he got the US involved in World War I to begin with.
It probably wasn't practical to get the US involved from the word go. Not enough elite support. So it's hard to blame that on Wilson, if you think it's blameworthy.
Germany wouldn't have the forces to spare to reinforce, the western flank would've folded and Germany would have lost the war while Russia was under the provincial government meaning the Soviets would have never risen and in the treaty talks after, Wilson wouldn't have been invited to expel the virtues of interventionalism.
The US being involved from the beginning would have meant that it would have a greater, not smaller role, in the ensuing peace negotiations. The peace treaty would probably be less harsh than it was in 1919, as it was mostly harsh because of the large French influence. Maybe that's good, maybe not. The problem with Versailles was that it punished Germany enough to make it a revisionist power, but not enough to take away its power to do anything about it - at least not without constant vigilance.
The people constructing this hellhole did not beat or oppose the Nazis, they just like to virtue-signal on the grave of the Nazis.
And not liking them doesn't mean you have to like the Nazis. In fact, like I said, the Nazis failed hard on their own terms. It is exactly the rise and defeat of Nazism that has allowed the West to become the hellhole that it is.
That actually surprises me, given the brutality of the German occupation. How many millions of non-Jewish Poles did they kill? The Soviets were brutal, but they weren't killing people en masse.
Not that much actually if my late grandma's stories were anything to go by. Sure, she was locked up in a working camp and the time window for her meals was tiny so she always rushed first to the mess hall. But it wasn't Nazi's who infested our country with depressing brutalist architecture.
As much as I despise brutalist and modern architecture, I'd take that over being used as a foreign laborer and having my baby thrown out of a train window.
In the reports of your Nazi heroes themselves, who described how during train rides, they threw the babies of Slavic forced laborers out of the window.
Soviets wanted to blame Katyn on Germans during Nuremberg trials, but Brits talked them out of it, fearing it would make people doubt the truthfulness of the Holocaust narrative.
The idea that the Katyn massacre is not discussed because of 'Zionists' is literal insanity, but there's always gonna be people who want to blame everything on that one group they dislike.
The allies helped the Soviets cover up the massacre. And whenever I pointed that out to our SupremeReader of blessed memory (who has the Polish nationality), he got really angry at me.
a metric fuckton of the people leading the Russian Revolution
There's a reason you're not actually giving numbers and names. One is that you don't know them, you're just repeating stuff you've heard. Two is that if you did, well... I'll save the surprise for when you look it up.
And "unfortunately", the assertion was not even about the Russian Revolution, but about the USSR around World War II and the Allies. If you'd read some Russian history, you'd know there were massive purges in the meantime. Almost no one "leading the Russian Revolution" (as you call it) was even alive by 1945.
what I call ‘Early Life syndrome’
The question was about 'Zionists'. This comment is very revealing, though not a surprise to anyone.
It's not the homogeneity that makes for a high trust society. It's the absence of you know who. Haiti is very homogeneous. They don't have honor system stores there either.
Japan is an example that so long cultural hegemony in your country, you have the trust to have self checkouts, honor systems and don't have to worry about a spike in crime when economy gets rough
If a teenager is misbehaving in Japan, a cop will just beat them, drop them off to their parents, and let the parents know he beat their kid because the parents didn't.
No trial, no juvenile hall or kiddy prison to get the kids into gangs and criminal connections, no ignoring the problem, just a smackdown and a short explanation to make it clear to the parents that their parenting is the failure.
It's more than just societal shame, there's immediate and real ramifications when something goes awry in the youth, which trickles up into the adult population.
Allowing black cops to kill White kids is exactly how it would go. All he'd have to do is accuse the kid of saying the nigger word and he wouldn't even get a slap on the wrist.
I was stationed in Korea and shops often have tables outside their stores with goods, mostly beauty, school supply, cheap tools. I was taken aback when at night they would just throw a tarp over the table and secure everything with a single twine.
Try that in any city in America. Fuck, most places you can't even have that table out there when you're fucking open.
There used to be such things as "sidewalk sales" which were basically that, though the goods would be brought in at night. The tables might be kept outside, too, because who's gonna steal a table? 😐
When I visited Denmark back in the 90s, gas station owners would just leave their products like oil cans out in the open when they closed for the night.
It seems obvious that this is the reason. This is what Western countries were like in the 1950s. Everyone in Europe who remembers that time, says that you could leave your bike unlocked and no one would steal it. Now? You can put 3 locks on it and they'll still steal it.
Immigration played a major factor in the destruction of Western culture, but it's not the only thing. 1968 also played a large role.
My grandfather lived in a small town in the 60s/70s and had a gun stolen. It was a huge shock because it was the kind of society where no one locked their doors. The thief was some bad boy my aunt was dating. Some things never change.
Not judging, but I honestly cannot imagine not locking your doors in any society. The idea that just anyone can walk in - even if they never do - would drive me crazy.
How would high gun ownership help you against someone sneaking into your home and holding you at gunpoint - before you get the chance to get your gun? Of course, this question is theoretical, because obviously this did not happen in those areas.
The stereotypical olde tyme family had 3 kids and a big dog. Retriever or Shepherd, usually. Beyond just somehow sleeping through someone walking through your house, that was usually sufficient secondary alarms. Someone shoots the dog, you shoot them. Because you DO have your gun on-hand. One in the bedroom, one on the mantle in the family room, sometimes one by the door.
If it's a farmstead or plantation house, even more animals would be about and easily startled by strangers. People call cows dumb, but if someone untoward came towards my grandfather's farm, they'd have three bulls surrounding them real quick, any time of day.
What I don't get is: why leave your door unlocked? If your dogs getting shot serve as advance warning, how about having your door being bashed in serve as that?
It's inconvenient. Someone might need to come in at night. A relative, or a neighbor in a jam. You want to be helpful to them.
That's literally the thought process. Bad people will break in anyways, so only good people will be kept out by the locks, so why lock it? And of course, people didn't bash a door in, they used lockpicks, it was a more elegant time. Or at least that was the perception.
Now, we see things differently. We see things in a Modern Current Year lens.
Were I grew up in NZ in the 90s we didnt always lock our doors. I'd come home from school and the house would just be open with no one in it.
Its not like that anymore though.
Which country in the world produces the most original media, marketing, entertainment? It's Japan by a longshot. But Japan is an ethno state so when they say "diversity is good" in the context of business performance, Japan proves them wrong. How good can diversity really be if a country with none of it can be number 1? And not in any industry but specifically the creative industries.. the industries where you could make a rational case that diversity could lead to more diverse ideas and thus be useful. It's definitely a red pill
Honestly, the majority of farmers in the US would give free food and use the honor system if not for donation laws. The majority of states now have anti-donation laws because of people trying to donate rotten food to shelters to get tax right-offs.
Every 30 years, the USA complains that Japan hasn't caught up. By coincidence it is usually that Japan has the morals and ideas planted in them by Americans from 30 years ago. Remember being told Japanese work to death? It's still happening, but not as much today. So, the USA needs a reason to demand Japan change to 'modern time's.
It sucks reading this because I know i've gone from high-trust to low-trust in my own lifetime and my kids will never know what a high trust society is like.
So many people find the transition so painful they just refuse to acknowledge reality, and keep pretending everything's the same.
Their economy is stagnant, their people are overworked and suicidal, and they're slowly dying out. Japan isn't well functioning.
This is the bullshit leftists push to destroy Japan. If Japan accepts the globalists agenda, then soon it won't even be Japan. What good is a big population, if it's a bunch of violent, third world welfare leeches?
The reason leftists hate Japan is because their media is popular in the west and it isn't Marxist, which makes them an enemy in their culture war.
Which is why they plan to force replacement immigration and ultimately destroy Japanese culture.
I agree with you about the 'solutions' causing gigantic problems in the future, but it's not bullshit that their economy is stagnant and they have an unhealthy overwork culture.
the slave trade was one of the largest blunders in history, but not because it was morally wrong, but because, well .. look at the state of the US. should have left them in africa.
It's one of the greatest ironies that the reason we have this problem today is because Southern society as a whole was too merciful toward their slaves.
Kept families together, didn't work them to death like in Spanish Central America, didn't geld them like the Arabian slave trade did, allowed them a modicum of travel, payment, and their own crops to sell...
There's a lesson there, but it's not exactly a pleasant one.
Keep in mind that slave work went on long after importation was banned. So slave owners couldn't afford to work slaves to death because they couldn't just get more.
It wasn't a blunder. The South was always mortgaged to The City of London. The rootless cosmopolitans that run international finance always, always use imported slave labor (or even better, native slave labor) to work their mines and t heir plantations.
It was planned. It is their modus operandi. they do it all the time, every single time. It also helped create a fissure between USA nationalist and Southern plantation owners. A win-win for globalist financiers. They destroy nationalism wherever the find it. Nationalism directly opposes the globalist criminal cabals of middlemen and cosmopolitan financiers.
It was still morally wrong faggot. Just because some white southerners saw picking cotton as beneath them, doesn't mean you should import foreign populations for cheap goods.
Probably because a lot of Americans celebrate Christmas. Traditionally at least, we’re talking about a large percentage of Americans. Nobody wants to trade at an exchange with low volume.
4 teenage boys raped and murdered a teenage girl. All of them were caught and jailed.
Japanese society heavily condemned the incident and was worried that America's culture of violent crime was affecting them that they even called it 'America disease'
And yet, communists make up lies and claimed that : "200 men raped the girl and murdered her and got away with it and no one cared"
These lying communists also happened to write the narratives of ww2. Keep that in mind.
It's so rare in Japan that I know exactly what case you mean. The girl encased in concrete. And that happened in 1988. Shit probably happens a dozen times a year in the US.
WW2 narratives are lies? I guess the Germans were responsible for the Katyn massacre after all, because the lying communists who wrote the narratives say it was the Soviets.
Yeah let's be honest here, was Japan and Germany MASSIVELY fucked up during WW2, yes.
But looked at who CONTINUED to do fucked up shit AFTER the war to know the left haven't got the moral high ground they think they have.
How were they massively fucked up? The US locked American japs up in labor camps in the mountains after stealing all their property. Then dropped atom and firebombs all over their cities. Dropped firebombs and starved the Germans out. Then released feral nigger units on them to rape and pillage.
Don't really think anybody did anything worse than that. Maybe equally as so but war is war. If you'll excuse those acts of war what did the Germans or japs do that was worse?
Unit 731 and the fact the SS were so bad the German army despised them and right at the end allied with the Americans to fight them over a castle.
If we're just talking about killcount then yeah all as bad as each other but the methodology of how they killed, Nazis and Japanese kinda worse on that front..
All the Axis countries were strongly anti communist (and it wasn't just Japan and Germany). Meanwhile what were the Allies made out of? meanwhile who were the leaders of the Allied forces? USSR a literal communist dictatorship and a leftist American president.
And people wonder why the world is controlled by leftists now after they won ww2
I also read the same fairy tales. I'm sure the Germans hated the ss just like we were told to believe lol
There are MULTIPLE examples of Germans turning on the SS including The battle of Castle Itter
A lot of actual actions against the SS happened towards the end when basically the army knew if they surrendered to the west they'd be fine, the SS dig in because EVERYONE knew the shit that they did.
Oh wow 10 wehrmacht that wanted to surrender during the end of the war fought with ss holdouts. Wowzers
Japs did way worse. Human experimentation, mass graves, comfort women. I'm glad america nuked them so they could gtfo of my country
Ya same shit the west did. Mass starvation in India, experimented on our own population with shit like syphilis. Comfort women? Aka war brides. Sounds the same.
Confort women were the Japanese...the way the moral of the US military was kept up was ice cream
Morale*
The USSR was committing atrocities before and after World War II, and in fact, fear of communism was what led to the rise of Nazism to begin with. The whole 20th century was a disaster.
It was perfectly legitimate to view the Nazis as less bad than communists as of 1933. That said, those who view the Nazis positively as of 2024 are retards, because they failed even on their own terms.
Can we all just collectively agree, the rise in communism during the 20th century along with Nazis was all Woodrow Wilson's fault?
True but better to get rid of the original so the evolved can't exist.
Not quite, both were the fault of Germany's decision to launch a war of aggression against France in 1914. The tsar had already fallen by the time Wilson took the US into war, but the continuaton of the war then led to the fall of the Provisional Government.
The decision to remove the monarchy in Germany was also a disastrous one.
Oh I don't mean stopping the war, I mean ending it early. Wilson is the one that delayed American troops joining till they eventually did. By this time Russia had withdrawn from the war so Germany could move it's Eastern forces to reinforce the Western flank to combat the newly arriving Americans.
If they had been sent earlier (which is what Teddy wanted), Germany wouldn't have the forces to spare to reinforce, the western flank would've folded and Germany would have lost the war while Russia was under the provincial government meaning the Soviets would have never risen and in the treaty talks after, Wilson wouldn't have been invited to expel the virtues of interventionalism.
You're European, right? It shows, because most Americans who despise Wilson do so because he got the US involved in World War I to begin with.
It probably wasn't practical to get the US involved from the word go. Not enough elite support. So it's hard to blame that on Wilson, if you think it's blameworthy.
The US being involved from the beginning would have meant that it would have a greater, not smaller role, in the ensuing peace negotiations. The peace treaty would probably be less harsh than it was in 1919, as it was mostly harsh because of the large French influence. Maybe that's good, maybe not. The problem with Versailles was that it punished Germany enough to make it a revisionist power, but not enough to take away its power to do anything about it - at least not without constant vigilance.
we never should have gotten involved
Had me in the first half there
Explain why you view the Nazis positively in 2024 (if you do).
Because their enemies have constructed this hell hole we live in now
The people constructing this hellhole did not beat or oppose the Nazis, they just like to virtue-signal on the grave of the Nazis.
And not liking them doesn't mean you have to like the Nazis. In fact, like I said, the Nazis failed hard on their own terms. It is exactly the rise and defeat of Nazism that has allowed the West to become the hellhole that it is.
You wouldn't like them cause they would have kept shit skins like yourself out of Europe.
That's pretty good, but they would have done a lot of other things as well. I don't think you need Nazism to oppose mass immigration.
That is, if they had even survived up to 2024, which the other totalitarian power certainly didn't.
As a polish man you can hate both.
If you ask any surviving fossil from those times they will tell you they preferred the german occupation.
That actually surprises me, given the brutality of the German occupation. How many millions of non-Jewish Poles did they kill? The Soviets were brutal, but they weren't killing people en masse.
Not that much actually if my late grandma's stories were anything to go by. Sure, she was locked up in a working camp and the time window for her meals was tiny so she always rushed first to the mess hall. But it wasn't Nazi's who infested our country with depressing brutalist architecture.
As much as I despise brutalist and modern architecture, I'd take that over being used as a foreign laborer and having my baby thrown out of a train window.
Aren’t you a fag? Where did you find a baby? In the tunnels?
Probably in the running for funniest comment ever posted here.
Half of one.
In the reports of your Nazi heroes themselves, who described how during train rides, they threw the babies of Slavic forced laborers out of the window.
Soviets wanted to blame Katyn on Germans during Nuremberg trials, but Brits talked them out of it, fearing it would make people doubt the truthfulness of the Holocaust narrative.
Interesting. Where can I read more about this?
The idea that the Katyn massacre is not discussed because of 'Zionists' is literal insanity, but there's always gonna be people who want to blame everything on that one group they dislike.
The allies helped the Soviets cover up the massacre. And whenever I pointed that out to our SupremeReader of blessed memory (who has the Polish nationality), he got really angry at me.
Do you know the origin of “11 million”?
Actually, no. That's just stupid.
“Unfortunately”, a metric fuckton of the people leading the Russian Revolution fall victim to what I call ‘Early Life syndrome’
There's a reason you're not actually giving numbers and names. One is that you don't know them, you're just repeating stuff you've heard. Two is that if you did, well... I'll save the surprise for when you look it up.
And "unfortunately", the assertion was not even about the Russian Revolution, but about the USSR around World War II and the Allies. If you'd read some Russian history, you'd know there were massive purges in the meantime. Almost no one "leading the Russian Revolution" (as you call it) was even alive by 1945.
The question was about 'Zionists'. This comment is very revealing, though not a surprise to anyone.
It's not the homogeneity that makes for a high trust society. It's the absence of you know who. Haiti is very homogeneous. They don't have honor system stores there either.
Its the same with Covid and Sweden.
Leftists hate when a country is successful because they ignored their policies.
Japan is an example that so long cultural hegemony in your country, you have the trust to have self checkouts, honor systems and don't have to worry about a spike in crime when economy gets rough
So it's a complete rejection of mass immigration.
plus the japanese shame people who do shitty things. and it seems most take responsibility by resigning when they fuck up.
If a teenager is misbehaving in Japan, a cop will just beat them, drop them off to their parents, and let the parents know he beat their kid because the parents didn't.
No trial, no juvenile hall or kiddy prison to get the kids into gangs and criminal connections, no ignoring the problem, just a smackdown and a short explanation to make it clear to the parents that their parenting is the failure.
It's more than just societal shame, there's immediate and real ramifications when something goes awry in the youth, which trickles up into the adult population.
Imagine empowering black cops to discipline white children.
“You can pick up your cracker kid at the hospital if he wakes up.”
Allowing black cops to kill White kids is exactly how it would go. All he'd have to do is accuse the kid of saying the nigger word and he wouldn't even get a slap on the wrist.
I was stationed in Korea and shops often have tables outside their stores with goods, mostly beauty, school supply, cheap tools. I was taken aback when at night they would just throw a tarp over the table and secure everything with a single twine.
Try that in any city in America. Fuck, most places you can't even have that table out there when you're fucking open.
Oh geez I wonder why?
There used to be such things as "sidewalk sales" which were basically that, though the goods would be brought in at night. The tables might be kept outside, too, because who's gonna steal a table? 😐
When I visited Denmark back in the 90s, gas station owners would just leave their products like oil cans out in the open when they closed for the night.
It seems obvious that this is the reason. This is what Western countries were like in the 1950s. Everyone in Europe who remembers that time, says that you could leave your bike unlocked and no one would steal it. Now? You can put 3 locks on it and they'll still steal it.
Immigration played a major factor in the destruction of Western culture, but it's not the only thing. 1968 also played a large role.
My grandfather lived in a small town in the 60s/70s and had a gun stolen. It was a huge shock because it was the kind of society where no one locked their doors. The thief was some bad boy my aunt was dating. Some things never change.
Not judging, but I honestly cannot imagine not locking your doors in any society. The idea that just anyone can walk in - even if they never do - would drive me crazy.
The past really is another country.
Live in a place with both high gun ownership and supportive and functional law enforcement.
The druggies know to only steal from each other because if the homeowner doesn't get them the cops will.
How would high gun ownership help you against someone sneaking into your home and holding you at gunpoint - before you get the chance to get your gun? Of course, this question is theoretical, because obviously this did not happen in those areas.
The stereotypical olde tyme family had 3 kids and a big dog. Retriever or Shepherd, usually. Beyond just somehow sleeping through someone walking through your house, that was usually sufficient secondary alarms. Someone shoots the dog, you shoot them. Because you DO have your gun on-hand. One in the bedroom, one on the mantle in the family room, sometimes one by the door.
If it's a farmstead or plantation house, even more animals would be about and easily startled by strangers. People call cows dumb, but if someone untoward came towards my grandfather's farm, they'd have three bulls surrounding them real quick, any time of day.
What I don't get is: why leave your door unlocked? If your dogs getting shot serve as advance warning, how about having your door being bashed in serve as that?
It's inconvenient. Someone might need to come in at night. A relative, or a neighbor in a jam. You want to be helpful to them.
That's literally the thought process. Bad people will break in anyways, so only good people will be kept out by the locks, so why lock it? And of course, people didn't bash a door in, they used lockpicks, it was a more elegant time. Or at least that was the perception.
Now, we see things differently. We see things in a Modern Current Year lens.
If you don't live around blacks that just doesn't happen.
Were I grew up in NZ in the 90s we didnt always lock our doors. I'd come home from school and the house would just be open with no one in it. Its not like that anymore though.
Which country in the world produces the most original media, marketing, entertainment? It's Japan by a longshot. But Japan is an ethno state so when they say "diversity is good" in the context of business performance, Japan proves them wrong. How good can diversity really be if a country with none of it can be number 1? And not in any industry but specifically the creative industries.. the industries where you could make a rational case that diversity could lead to more diverse ideas and thus be useful. It's definitely a red pill
Which is why they want to destroy it with mass immigration. Then they'll just deny that it ever existed in the way it does now. I hate them so much.
Honestly, the majority of farmers in the US would give free food and use the honor system if not for donation laws. The majority of states now have anti-donation laws because of people trying to donate rotten food to shelters to get tax right-offs.
Every 30 years, the USA complains that Japan hasn't caught up. By coincidence it is usually that Japan has the morals and ideas planted in them by Americans from 30 years ago. Remember being told Japanese work to death? It's still happening, but not as much today. So, the USA needs a reason to demand Japan change to 'modern time's.
It's exactly why. It's also why they attack countries like Hungary- they especially hate Japan because they can't call them white supremacists.
It sucks reading this because I know i've gone from high-trust to low-trust in my own lifetime and my kids will never know what a high trust society is like.
So many people find the transition so painful they just refuse to acknowledge reality, and keep pretending everything's the same.
we don't accept it. it isn't natural. it was done to us.
Because "Americans" would break it and steal everything
I've seen the same thing in the US at places, too.
Also, they don't do that in Japan in big cities for the same reason they don't do that in big cities in the US.
If homogeneity was the only factor, africa would be full of high trust societies.
Their economy is stagnant, their people are overworked and suicidal, and they're slowly dying out. Japan isn't well functioning.
The reason leftists hate Japan is because their media is popular in the west and it isn't Marxist, which makes them an enemy in their culture war.
You've certainly demonstrated the leftist's view of Japan. No need to worry, mass immigration will save them.
This is the bullshit leftists push to destroy Japan. If Japan accepts the globalists agenda, then soon it won't even be Japan. What good is a big population, if it's a bunch of violent, third world welfare leeches?
Which is why they plan to force replacement immigration and ultimately destroy Japanese culture.
https://archive.is/https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/ageing/replacement-migration.asp
I agree with you about the 'solutions' causing gigantic problems in the future, but it's not bullshit that their economy is stagnant and they have an unhealthy overwork culture.
the slave trade was one of the largest blunders in history, but not because it was morally wrong, but because, well .. look at the state of the US. should have left them in africa.
It's one of the greatest ironies that the reason we have this problem today is because Southern society as a whole was too merciful toward their slaves.
Kept families together, didn't work them to death like in Spanish Central America, didn't geld them like the Arabian slave trade did, allowed them a modicum of travel, payment, and their own crops to sell...
There's a lesson there, but it's not exactly a pleasant one.
Keep in mind that slave work went on long after importation was banned. So slave owners couldn't afford to work slaves to death because they couldn't just get more.
Nah.
It wasn't a blunder. The South was always mortgaged to The City of London. The rootless cosmopolitans that run international finance always, always use imported slave labor (or even better, native slave labor) to work their mines and t heir plantations.
It was planned. It is their modus operandi. they do it all the time, every single time. It also helped create a fissure between USA nationalist and Southern plantation owners. A win-win for globalist financiers. They destroy nationalism wherever the find it. Nationalism directly opposes the globalist criminal cabals of middlemen and cosmopolitan financiers.
It was still morally wrong faggot. Just because some white southerners saw picking cotton as beneath them, doesn't mean you should import foreign populations for cheap goods.
cool it with antisemitic remarks
Go pick cotton
And when did Portugal become jewish?
why were the slave markets closed on Jewish holidays
Why is the stock market closed on Christmas?
Probably because a lot of Americans celebrate Christmas. Traditionally at least, we’re talking about a large percentage of Americans. Nobody wants to trade at an exchange with low volume.
Jews have lived on the Iberian peninsula since Roman times. They have been well-established in the land that is now Portugal for sixteen centuries.
And they were in the slave trade.
So were the Portuguese.
There are many phrases that have guided society, but I doubt anyone was betting on "always spay and neuter your pets" being so important.
Comment Reported for: Rule 2 - Violent Speech
Comment Removed for: Rule 2 - Violent Speech
Comment Reported for: Rule 16 - Identity Attacks
Comment Removed for: Rule 16 - Identity Attacks
Claiming a race is inherently inferior and incapable of forming or participating in trusting societies.