has pol even read this book?
Has pol even read this book?
Other urls found in this thread:
Of course not, since Sup Forums tends only to read to confirm their biases. But even when you discuss it on /lit/ people say he is a democrat thus controlled by the jews [spoiler]even though he counseled reprisals against Black leaders to Afrikaner S. Africa[/spoiler]
Also, he is not racialist. He believes in the governance of universal human traits and systems. Despite this he offers the most cogent discussion of the world in crisis despite writing the book years ago.
Yes. Good read if you're interested in geopolitics.
It was quite prophetic when you consider it was written in '96 when everyone thought in terms of the "end of history".
He wasn't completely right when he thought that the two Koreas would unify again or that Bulgaria, Romania and Serbia would rather go towards Russia than the EU. He also did underestimate the strife in the muslim world.
What do you think about his angle on South America?
What was his angle on south america?
The mexico part?
Never heard of it until now. Thanks for posting it. I wish Sup Forums had more book threads.
Also Political Power, Political Decay by Fukuyama, its his mea culpa on the end of history sillyness.
I believe he found that due to peninsular exclusionary practices, economic exploitation, and intermarrying with Amerindian elements, South America will continue on an individual trajectory that will result in the birth of (if it hasnt happened already) a new young civilization. He also has concerns about America remaining part of the west when its multicultural elements are actively withdrawing, in addition to the massive latin american influence.
It makes sense, since latinoamerica is the offspring of europeans, but is not european.
We had this in school a few years ago, as far as I know the assessment of the book is too simplified and not correct/leads to false assumptions
E.g The borders between the different cultures are supposed to be mayor "conflict-lines", whereas more often conflicts occurred inside the cultures
Here we go
Im reading Darwins On the origin of species right now
The only people on /lit/ posting things about people being controlled by jews are Sup Forums posters venturing out of containment.
Its a good book, Sup Forums would do well to read it - having your perspectives challenged is a good thing.
Barber's Jihad McWorld is superior.
If you live in Europe or the US you live under such a pervasive propaganda system that rejecting or at least questioning everything in the media is good enough.
>even though he counseled reprisals against Black leaders to Afrikaner S. Africa
Since it is a book, and by extension you have to read it, it may not be for you.
/lit/ is the closest thing there is to a catholic board, and the apolitical are all classical jacobins. I've been on it for years, and the only claims that it is /leftypol/ seems to come from shitposters. commies get btfo, and jew posters get roasted when they are pointed to Roth, who basically shits on the jewish ideal.
/lit/ is a great board
Great discussions and its not full of leftist fags like /his/
Comfy as fuck
not to mention almost universal praise of Junger and Mishima
>reading books that are essentially the written version of talking head "commentary" youtube e-celebs
How about reading a book that's useful? Like some history?
Was about to post that, now im out
Junger is great, havent read anything by mishima yet
I feel like one should start with the Tetrology and patriotism desu. Patriotism is quite quick.
pic related could be said to be the same
He saw South America to be not quite belonging to the western world but having developed its own civilization even if highly influenced by the Spanish and Portugese conquistadores.
He predicted a secessionist movement of the South-Western USA at around 2025 when the Latino population becomes a closed voting block with its own language and roots tied to their homeland.
I don't remember he talking a lot about latinoamerica.
maybe I was watching a resume on youtube.
>pic related could be said to be the same
He provided a solution, so no he's not the same.
Utterly brilliant. Everything he predicted has come to pass. Conflict over Ukraine. Muslims shitting everything up. He was basically called a Nazi for his rational observations, all of which were blatantly obvious. My favorite quotes are:
“Some Westerners […] have argued that the West does not have problems with Islam but only with violent Islamist extremists. Fourteen hundred years of history demonstrate otherwise.”
“The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”
By far his best ideas are that after times of upheaval civilizations always revert back to their natural state. Thus, he implicitly argues that culture is a product of race and biology. He also notes that Western "universalism" and liberalism is just a new form of Western imperialism. It's goal is to turn everyone in the world into a white, urbanite liberal.
Great book. Sup Forums should check it out.
>muh goal lines
tons of shitty pundits have lots of answers. Huntington is giving form to chaos that leads to state stability and addresses the problems of "torn" states.
I read it before 9/11 and thought that term "clash of civilizations" was little over the top. I was wrong.
He also predicted that Islamist movement runs out of fuel demographically when over-representation of young males in Middle East population ends. He was wrong.
>I don't remember he talking a lot about latinoamerica.
Latin America doesn't seem to be of great interest him, out of the Mexican-US interaction.
He doesn't think the Latin American civilization has any potential conflicts coming up with the islamic or Hindu or Sino civilization and will rather sail along silently through the 21st century.
Have you read his later book "Who are we?" about the demographic change of the US? I haven't and it seems to me most people haven't read it as well. Why is that? It might be exactly the book that with the election of Trump should be reread.
>By far his best ideas are that after times of upheaval civilizations always revert back to their natural state.
Yes, the chapter about the resurgence of Islam is the best in the book. He knew what's happening now 20 years ago.
that's one of the benefits of geographical isolation.
our only real relationship is USA.
>He also predicted that Islamist movement runs out of fuel demographically when over-representation of young males in Middle East population ends.
In his prediction that's yet to come I think. But that prediction may be wrong nevertheless.
One of the best quotes of his book regarding the dominance of Western values is
>The culural essence of the West isn't the Big Mac but the Magna Carta.
I'm paraphrasing of course. He pointed out that there is a delusion going on in the liberal interventionist circles in the US who don't want to recognize that it is of no importance whether Mickey Mouse and McDonalds are consumed by goat herders in arabic countries. This so called "full spectrum dominance" is just a fad. They world has NOT gotten smaller because of globalization. The Chinese are not more similar to us now. They hold on to their values and religions EVEN stronger!
pol has never read a book period
For you, matey.
Has someone read "The French Revolution" by Thomas Carlyle?
What stance on the FR does he take? Is it similar to Burke?
Most of what he wrote was already predicted by a much better scholar, Lothrop Stoddard, in the 1920s. Look him up.
The big difference is that Huntington explored the clash of civlizations from a cultural perspective while Stoddard did it from a racial perspective, which makes the latter better IMHO.
His predictions are amazing considering that he made them in 1920.
>Some of the predictions that he made in The Rising Tide of Color were accurate, not all of which were original to Stoddard or predicated on white supremacy. They include Japan's rise as a major power; a war between Japan and the US; a second war in Europe; the overthrowing of European colonial empires in Africa and Asia; the mass migration of non-white peoples to white countries; and the rise of extremist Islamism as a rival to Western civilization because of religious radicalism. (Stoddard was Anti-Islamic and would publish the book The New World of Islam in 1921.)