Loki’s War or Long division or SchlaueKrieg or The Ethnic Bomb


The chaos that has engulfed Russia/Ukraine was highly predictable. I know this because I predicted it two years ago. The covert German campaign to dominate the Slavic people (SchlaueKrieg) has been a constant theme in my writings on Whiteism.

Nearly five years ago I began to describe Whiteism, (’Forget Racism, Lets Talk About Whiteism’), the ideological framework which seeks to subjugate all ‘white’ people under Germanic law, economics and culture.

This ‘White’ identity is a key component of Germanic strategy to dominate and control the planet. Its purpose is to generalise and universalise the Germanic identity as much as possible, through the argument that all white people naturally live under and promote capitalism and ‘democracy’ etc. ALL Germans are engaged in this process of promoting Whiteism, especially the ‘progressive left wing’. The message of ‘universal brotherhood’ of the ‘working class’ is the Germanic soft cop to the hard cop of subversion, coup and military force.

Whiteism effectively turns non-German whites into cultural, political and economic, hostages; a human shield against the people of the rest of the world. Just as English WWI generals famously sent the lesser whites onto the German guns in preference to home grown troops, so we are expendable in the plan for domination.

A discussion about white racism is infinitely preferable to the continental German and Anglo Saxon elites than a discussion about Anglo Saxon/German domination.

I have written about the Germanic subjugation of the Gaelic people in the west of Europe.  As part of this ongoing subjugation, the territory of The Republic of Ireland was actually recently transferred in ownership like a plantation from the Anglo-Saxons to the Continental Germans! This was the so-called ‘peace process’.  It was inevitable to anyone with even a rudimentary knowledge of history that the Germans would botch the administration of their new territory and the result has been poverty and chaos.

After Ireland was partially pacified, France became the next target for Germanicisation. I have described the political necessity of this process for Whiteism in the USE blog over a number of years. French foreign policy is now openly dictated by Bonn and Washington. As a result France is now actively engaged in war and subversion in the Middle East and Africa. Its domestic economy is being systematically undermined and destroyed in preparation for privatisation along the neo liberal model. Once this is achieved NO POLITICAL OPPOSITION WILL BE POSSIBLE.

And so the white population of the west of Europe is for now completely under German control. Well not quite.

One small region holds out against the German forces. Scotland is to hold an Independence referendum later this year.

We now move to the Eastern Germania border and Ukraine. It seems that German sponsored Ukrainians have seized control of Kiev and the western territories of Ukraine. It is uncertain what government can be set up that will have the support of the Eastern Crimea. A number of pundits are becoming increasingly nervous about this as direct challenge to Russia on its borders. There can be no doubt of the German desire to fundamentally overthrow the leadership of Russia through a mixture of intimidation, economic pressure and so called soft power. Perhaps SchlaueKrieg (Sly war) can do what Blitzkrieg (lightning war) could not.

Perhaps Loki can triumph where Thor could not.

Which brings us to the meaning of Whiteism.

Increasingly we see ‘soft power’; subversion, propaganda, psychological warfare being used against the enemies of the Germanic Empire. Increasingly this SchlaueKrieg uses race and ethnic identity as the point of leverage for its attack. Ukraine, Syria and the two most recent examples of this. And yet, there is no corresponding counter attack form the non-white peoples of the world. The situation we are in closely resembles the period when America got the Atomic Bomb and no-one else had it.

What would have been the consequences if America had remained the sole possessor of this destructive power?

Thankfully we never had to find out.  We must put the secret of manufacturing an ethnic bomb in the hands of brown skinned people across the planet. We must show them the ethnic cultural and religious fault lines that run through the Germanic empire. We must help them to learn to exploit them. We must create a new balance of forces in the SchlaueKrieg world. Or we must, in the end, face global conflict.

If Russia falls under the control of Germanic power, all the ‘white’ races will be ‘unified’ for the first time in over a hundred years. If that happens the elite will launch an attack on China.

You will have to decide whether you and your children can live with that.


MAD or It Was Only A Matter Of Time…or I Wouldn’t Start From Here..or May The Road Rise Up To Meet You


‘Oh my God. I’m back. I’m home. All the time, it was… We finally really did it.


 You Maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God Damn you all to hell! ‘

The Destruction of Creative Destruction

The term Creative Destruction has come to be associated with neo-liberal economics but it comes from Karl Marx, the unacknowledged father of modern ‘right wing’ thought. Marx is sometimes accused in historical biography of fathering an illegitimate son. Whether this particular accusation stands up or not, the famous Germanic features of The Moor can clearly be seen in the lineage of Monetarism and Neo-Liberalism.

Marx coined the term ‘creative destruction’ to describe the ceaseless process whereby Capitalism consumes everything that it creates; previous methods, institutions and even capital itself are burned up to make way for a new cycle of expansion and growth.

The phrase was adopted by Austrian/American economist Joseph Schumpeter:

Capitalism […] is by nature a form or method of economic change (…) that incessantly revolutionizes the economic structure from within, incessantly destroying the old one, incessantly creating a new one. This process of Creative Destruction is the essential fact about capitalism. It is what capitalism consists in and what every capitalist concern has got to live in.’

Schumpeter was forced to draw sombre conclusions about the future of capitalism as a result of his observations. Since like a frenzied shark, capitalism could and would eat even its own entrails when circumstances allowed it, how could even the most fundamental aspects of the system be guaranteed to stay in place?

This proved to be Marx’s irrefutable argument. If capitalism does indeed develop by a means of creative destruction, does that not make it inevitable that in the end it will consume the very fabric of the system itself by a process of destructive cycles?

After all, the observation that all societies finally collapse is a piece of accepted wisdom that far predates Marx. Marx’s achievement was simply to describe how collapse would happen this time around.

 It’s A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad, World.

 Around the time that creative destruction was entering the modern lexicon another phrase was becoming popularised; M.A.D. or Mutually Assured Destruction based on the idea that the Soviet Union and America would never launch all out thermo nuclear war because it would result in both countries being effectively destroyed. In an incredible leap of something, it was widely accepted that this meant that balance had somehow been reached and that this balance somehow rested upon logic.

But this is not what MAD suggests at all. What MAD suggests is that Russia and USA WILL INEVITABLY destroy each other. What MAD suggests is that being diagnosed with a terminal condition puts your winter cold in perspective. MAD suggests is that there is some small comfort in knowing HOW you finally buy the farm before it actually happens. MAD is a form of, well, controlled madness.

The implications of MAD are that once Russia and America went down this path they sealed our fate. We are living in a bubble of time before inevitable destruction comes.

The threat of thermo-nuclear annihilation and recognition of the essentially destructive nature of capitalism give rise to a sense of profound foreboding in western thought and by extension, western popular culture. This foreboding finds popular expression in apocalyptic books and movies.

If not the last, then perhaps the next to last word in such literature is ‘The Road’ by Cormac McCarthy; a work that could as fairly be called ‘postal’, (in the modern American sense of the word), apocalyptic as opposed to post apocalyptic. The book, the audiobook and even the film can be found on the Internet and I would heartily recommend that you seek out all three, but with the gentle warning that this is ‘family’ entertainment in the sense it is about family, rather than the traditional Hollywooden sense of the phrase.

All dramatic constructions have an inflection point and in the film adaption of The Road, the crucial expository scene is carried by the considerable presence and acting skill of Robert Duvall. Duvall’s character is only onscreen for a relatively brief time, but his wonderfully understated dialogue lays the basis for the whole narrative. Staring through the flickering flames of a campfire with milky cataract occluded eyes ‘Ely’ tells us that: (I paraphrase)

‘We knew this, or something like it was coming for a long time’

Which links us in the here and now with the terrible twisted landscape we see before us. But even as we watch the screen and accept that we have this terrible foreknowledge, Ely tells us we are effectively powerless;

‘Even if you knew, what could you do to prepare for this?’

And it is true that destruction on the scale of ‘The Road’ would make even the most comprehensive of preparations look irrelevant. So is this Ely’s and our awful fate; to move towards disaster, fully conscious and yet be unable to do anything to change our destiny?

There is the old Irish joke of the tourist who is wandering round the roads out in the countryside and happens upon a local man. The tourist asks for directions:

‘Excuse me, can you tell me the way to Limerick?’ asks the tourist

The Irishman ponders for a short while and then says

‘Well, I wouldn’t have started from here’

This story bears a little scrutiny. First there is the simple joke that illustrates the Gaelic way of gently telling the man he is a fool, that he is lost and he should not even be out here. But as so often with Gaelic humour there is another deeper (blacker), joke wrapped up within a joke. The real, deep humour is that the tourist would never for a moment consider going back to where he came from and starting his journey again. Because that is his nature. That is why he got lost in the first place.

Which brings us back to the road we are presently travelling and creative destruction.

Risk we are told, is integral to the healthy functioning of the capitalist system. Without risk there would be ‘moral hazard’.  Destruction of your enterprise and the fear of destruction of your enterprise is what keeps you honest and efficient. However, by the same token, overcoming risk and its effects is integral to risk management. Risk management exists precisely to offset the effects of risk that is a constant threat to all capitalist enterprises.

With all the time and effort that has been expended on risk management in the past five decades, is it so unbelievable then that a method should finally be devised by these enterprises to remove risk from their day-to-day activities. ?

Isn’t this so? That effectively there is no meaningful risk involved in the operation of the biggest enterprises?

Creative destruction we are told is an integral part of the capitalist system and has been part of that system since it first ‘appeared’. But was it not inevitable, that since every aspect of capitalism is destroyed by its successor, that one day ‘creative destruction’ itself would be destroyed?

Isn’t that what has happened since financial institutions have been declared ‘Too Big To Fail’? And are these same institutions now not bigger and more concentrated forms of economic and political power than when the crisis started?

Crackernomics tells us that either

The system is basically sound and that what we are seeing is somehow the result of aberrant criminality

Or that what we are witnessing is somehow a natural phenomenon like a sandstorm or a tidal wave but that either way the system is sound and is the only viable option we have.

Crackernomics never invited the Crackers to consider whether they should not tear up the topsoil on the Great Plains, held in place by a delicate eco-system that had adapted for thousands of years to maintain the system in balance. It told them that this is the right and only thing to do. It told them to Stay On The Road they had set out on.

That we have come too far to go back now.

And when the great dust storm appeared on the horizon like the Wrath Of God the Crackers stood, although now blinded, finally able to see what had been staring them in the face all the time.

“Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.”

Robert Oppenheimer

 May the road rise up to meet you….




The Great Escape Or Moby Dick In Space




‘as they prepared for their journey and waved goodbye and “slipped the surly bonds of earth” to “touch the face of God.”

President Reagan’s remarks following the loss of the Space Shuttle Challenger and her crew. 06.07.04

Escape Velocity

You may have seen Sandra Bullock and George Clooney floating around in CGI space in the recently released film ‘Gravity’. This is a fascinating film for a number of reasons, but in the context of Mark Carney’s often-repeated‘ escape velocity’ it is particularly interesting.

Escape Velocity’ is an odd phrase to describe the economic conditions necessary for a reduction in the emergency measures that have been in place since 2009. A more orthodox approach to ‘perception management’ would employ images like  ‘laying the foundations’ of solid growth or ‘building’ on previous tough decisions, or even ‘husbanding the fragile buds’ of economic recovery. But here we are getting away from the mundane, even ‘surly’ realities of economics as we have known them. We seem to be:

‘Going boldly, where no economy has gone before.’

The first part of our journey to the stars, the escape bit, is something I have referred to only recently in ‘Great Expectations #1’:


I described the new reality that the Bank of England, independent as it is from any concerns you or I might have, is now free to pursue inflationary or anti-inflationary policies as it chooses. As it has grown more comfortable with this overt expression of its freedom, it’s ‘coming out’ as it were, the Bank has felt less and less compelled to invent ‘reasons’ as to why it follows this policy or that policy.

In 2008, like the Captain of the Pequod, the Bank of England claimed a mandate, (From God? From Destiny? – like Ahab they never made it clear from whom) to hunt the Great White Whale of Monetarism; INFLATION. They spent the next four years following this semi-mythical beast around without making any real attempt to harpoon it; if anything the Bank seemed content to throw trillions of tons of krill into the water to keep Moby Dick around!

Despite these inducements, the whale seems to have submerged for some time now, and so it was briefly replaced by our Captain with employment as a target. But employment provided only poor sport as a metric and as I predicted we would soon be driven to set our sights and our harpooners on something new. That something called out of the depths turned out to be:


What is the OUTPUT GAP?

It is ‘something to do with productivity’ Captain Ahab/Carney says, which is something we have never fished for before..

Well, how big is THE OUTPUT GAP?

The Output gap is 1.5 %, or is it 6 %? -Nobody seems to know which, doesn’t really seem to matter… we will know it when we see it says our captain.

From the Telegraph:

Mr Carney is asked: How will households understand the Bank’s new focus on productivity?

 Carney says that firstly, the economy has been stronger than we thought and that the Bank had expected that productivity growth would pick up alongside the recovery, which hasn’t happened.

So an economy can be strong and yet not productive? Care to elaborate? No?

What we’ve done is we have been more cautious in our assessment of productivity growth. Productivity does not get back to pre crisis growth until three years from now. We‘ve given our assessment of spare capacity and we’re going to update that regularly.

So that means Ahab intends to take the ship around the Cape of Good Hope three or four more times before he has to answer to the Quakers back in New England

And that is when Ahab/Carney nails his gold doubloon to the mast..

 Interest rates will not reach the 5pc levels seen before the crash for some time, the Bank also suggested. It said the “new normal” for interest rates was likely to be between 2pc and 3pc.

There she blows! – Now we have finally got something we can sink our harpoons into! – the New Normal of between 2 and 3 % bank of England base rate.

So what does a semi permanent interest rate of 2-3% mean or more importantly, (as Ahab correctly observed), what does it represent? it represents a permanent reduction in the earning power of money issued by the British State e.g. the earning power of the currency to you. So where has this earning power gone? It has been allocated to derivatives. It has been allocated to privately issued Democratised money.

Think of a £5 note as a betting slip. The odds quoted on the slip are the risk of holding the slip- the risk of gambling.

They are nothing to do with the odds of the horse winning a race or a football team winning a match. The horse race, or the football match is simply a trigger point.

The odds are literally a reflection of how a bookie will pay off everyone who bets with him. They are not a reflection of anything else. The Bank of England base rate is simply a reflection of how viable the Bank of England is- nothing else.

We need to get this absolutely clear. Here is an example:

Let’s say you went to a bookie and said you wanted to make a £1 bet that the moon will be discovered to have been made out of green cheese within five years (or if you like, will turn out to be a hollow spaceship a la David Icke.)  Since this is patently going to not turn out to be the case, what is to stop the bookie offering you odds of a million to one against, just to get the business? After all there is no risk that he will have to pay out is there?

But the bookie cannot offer you odds of a million to one unless he has taken a million pounds worth of business in to pay you out in the event that you should win. But surely he doesn’t have to have a million pounds in the bank just to cover the possibility I win. I am not going to win. So why can’t he just take the chance?




Now lets apply this to the Pound gamble. The Bank of England traditionally pays odds of 5% on their British economy book. These odds are a reflection of the likelihood that the British pound will be able to pay out, that the British pound will be worth something in a year’s time etc. The viability of the British book rests on the amount of business that the British book is doing, just the same as the book on the moon being made of green cheese. The Bookie cannot offer 1 million to one unless he has the business in to cover the bet. The Bank of England can only offer 5% interest if it has the business in to cover the bet.

And the Bank of England has given some of its business away.

It has given that business to Derivatives- to Democratised Money privately issued by the financial institutions. So it cannot pay out at 5% any more- it simply does not have the business to cover the odds. Now it is going to pay at 2-3 %. The British book has been shrunk. The business has gone to privately issued, Democratised money.

Like Ahab on the Pequod, once the coast has disappeared from view, the crew is at the mercy of it’s captain. Of whatever fancies come into his head. And we know from the story, don’t we that this was always Ahab’s design, right from the very beginning…

Like a rocket launched into space we will soon be permanently living in a new low/zero gravity monetary environment, with thinning bones and weakening heart, but free from earth…

 Can you hear me Major Tom…?

‘Space Oddity’ –  David Bowie

Whiteism: The Games People Play 1: Wheels on Fire


I am not a fan of mass spectator sport. The best that can be said for TV sport is that it’s like trying to diet by watching someone else eat a salad. If I wanted to be a little more pointed I would say that mass spectator sport is in essence a lot of losers staring at a few winners. Like mass consumption, mass spectatorship is predicated on a trick- that you can buy something you don’t have.

And while we are on the subject, there is nothing more profoundly dishonest than the plea to keep politics out of mass spectator sport. Since before the days of Rome, sport has been used for to further the agenda of whoever is staging the games.

‘The Hunger Games’ satirises this to great effect with the story of a young girl from a loser background that reveals hidden depths in the public spotlight. For Catniss Everdeen, success or failure in America’s dystopic future hinges on whether she can overcome brutal, ruthless enemies and win over the crowd to defeat the dark forces that brought her to the public arena as a ritual sacrifice.

The Hunger Games in turn refers to Carrie -the 1970 novel about the ugly duckling girl who reveals hidden, devastating, destructive power over the brutal high school crowd that torments her.


Girl on Fire

Well, it seems our dystopia hurtles nearer by the day, and if the Neo-Cons get their way, we will all be living in a global high school where the nerds sit at the back of the class in terror and the Anglo Saxon jocks rule the campus and the playing field. We have been offered front row seats at the spectacle of a middle-aged retreat into adolescent fantasy where ‘WE’ win game after game in an endless summer of rugged Anglo Saxon sport.

All of which brings me to the Winter Olympic Games.

Because if Russia is a kid in high school then she is Carrie, And if Russia is a place in our dystopic future then she is District 12


Another girl on fire

Carrie has a ‘weird’ Christian mother, which means she does not participate in the social life of small town America. And since her difference marks out as the loser, the different one, she serves as a perfect vehicle for the ‘popular’ kinds to sharpen their corporate social claws on.

This never-ending hate campaign is orchestrated by a malignant WASP chick that uses persecution as a means of validating her own control of the group. Of course given half a chance, Carrie turns out to be really quite beautiful, which revelation drives the WASP contingent to an ever-greater frenzy of hatred. So too, with Catniss of the Hunger Games, whose beauty wins the heart of even the jaded bloodthirsty crowds and drives her arch enemy, the President, to vow her death.


Julia Lipnitskaia Girl on ice….

 The climax of both stories brings us to a symbolic ‘coming out’. In Carrie it is the high school ball, her chance for social acceptability. Of course the WASP’s do not want this to happen and so they decide to ruin it for her. The plan is to pour pigs blood all over her-‘pigs blood for a pig’..  In the Hunger Games the final, dramatic, public contest is also rigged against our heroine, only this time she is fated to actually die at the hands of her classmates.

See the parallels?

Well let me make it clear for you

Liberal WASP society hates Russia, the international weirdos with the Christian mother, who just do not seem to get with the liberal programme, who just do not seem to ‘get’ who it is running things around here. And they intend to make sure that Catniss/Carrie/Russia does not get a chance to enjoy a day in the sun. ‘Oh no Sireee Bob, definitely not!’

So here they come dressed in rainbow flags, talking about gay rights and open drains and Chechnya , and so on, in an endless dreary parade of complaints and scarcely concealed insults all of which are supposed to take the shine off Russia’s day:

‘Why do you wear those funny clothes Carrie?  Do you have to go down on your knees and pray all night Carrie? – Oh that’s such a shame! Oh, we’re so glad we’re not you!’

‘Oh, Catniss you’re sure to die! Oh, but we’ll be sure to give you a wonderful burial!’

Falling over themselves to be the ones to tip the pigs blood on Carries prom dress. Falling over each other to be the one to put the blade through Catniss’s head.


The original girl on fire

Зоя Анатольевна Космодемьянская; Zoya

But they should perhaps tread a little more carefully. In the end the WASPS pushed Carrie over the edge and…well I won’t spoil the story for you if you haven’t read it. And if you have, well you know what happens…

And in the Hunger Games, the malignant manipulative president finds that he had rather more on his hands than he bargained for.

Inside Mother Russia, as inside a Babushka doll, you may find a Catniss/Carrie/Zoya,

Slave driver, the table is turn; )
Catch a fire, so you can get burn, now.
Slave driver, the table is turn;
Catch a fire: gonna get burn.

Bob Marley, Catch A Fire



I’m down with Big Brother- are you?

Let’s look at unemployment and the minimum wage in terms of our new, revised expectations

Unemployment is down-Employment is up?

Reducing the rate of unemployment is the same as increasing the rate of employment- isn’t it?

Well that all depends on what you mean by employment-

Full time employment in developed economies used to mean work that had certain expected entitlements such as:

The right to representation

The right to redundancy payments

The right to claim for unfair dismissal

The right to unemployment benefits

However under the new ‘Supply side’ Monetarist terms of the debate:


The right to Representation– Trades union representation is a mere fraction of what it was all over the developed economies in the post war period.

Britain now has some of the most stringent anti union laws in the western world- America is no better.

The right to Redundancy payments– In Britain there is no free access to legal representation, you take your chances at the back of the creditors queue (after the derivatives holders of course, who go straight to the front)

The right to claim for unfair dismissal- Not until you have worked for two years without making a claim in Britain. Before then you can be sacked for no reason.

So you can no longer expect to be employed in the sense the word meant in say, 1970 but that does not mean you are unemployed. In the Saxon Axis it is getting just as hard to be unemployed as it is to be employed.

The right to unemployment benefits – In USA despite the ongoing unemployment crisis payments to the unemployed are being cut back as well as food stamps. Labour participation rates in USA are at levels not seen for nearly half a century.  It is no better in Britain where unemployment payments ‘(Jobseekers ‘Allowance’!) is subject to ever more stringent conditionality tests.

And how does this effect your expectations?

Say hello to:

Zero hours contracts

This is ‘employment’ where the ‘employer’ does not even guarantee the ‘employee’ a minimum number of hours of work, you will simply be called (or not called on the day to do some work (or not). But of course if you are not available you can have wages (that you haven’t yet earned) docked, or even be sacked!


At zero hours are you employed or not?

Should these jobs be regarded as making the rate of unemployment fall?

Should these jobs be regarded as making the rate of employment rise?

What do you expect will happen?

The minimum wage is going up

Barry Obama and Gideon Osborne are both talking about an executive decision to increase the minimum wage-for Federal employees in USA to around $10 an hour and in Britain to  £7 an hour

Now surely this at least, is straightforward good news.

Well let’s look at the terms of the debate:

First of all the ‘non political’, ‘independent’ Low Pay Commission decides what the minimum wage rate should be

It follows from this that wages are not a matter of economic power because the poorest paid have none; if they did they would not need the state to impose an arbitrary wage rate.

It follows from this that the wage price is not a reflection of the value of the work being done, but of something else. It also follows that no real price signal is being transmitted to the wider market so the pricing signal system has broken down. In other words work is being done that under a ‘normal’ capitalist functioning system would not be done, causing a misallocation of resources.

Secondly, if you can’t negotiate your own wages you are not employed in any meaningful traditional sense of the word (see above)

Thirdly, the Low Pay commission decides the minimum national wage in the national interest, not in the interest of the lowest paid. If it were solely in the interests of the lowest paid then the minimum wage would be £50 an hour!

It follows from this that wages that are not negotiated by a worker in their own best interests cannot be called wages in any meaningful sense of the word!

 What does this mean for expectations?

Since wage rises are generally held to lead to inflation, you can expect that as long as the ability to negotiate wage rates is out of your hands and in the hands of the ‘independent’ Low Pay Commission and inflation rates are in the hands of the ‘independent’ Central Bank of England, you are always , no matter what the nominal figures are supposed to be end up with your disposable income going


So are you down with Big Brother now?