One of the states I find most fascinating, after Rhodesia, of course, is Singapore
Why?
Because, it, in its undemocratic nature and drive for excellence, shows how we can escape our current decline and build a future of greatness even as decline surrounds us
A short 🧵👇
Why is it a glimpse at a good future?
It, much like Rhodesia, embraced the functional aspects of our civilization without the egalitarian insanity
As such, it shows what me must avoid to have a thriving society
It is undemocratic, and thus practical rather than ideological, prosperous rather than race communism obsessed, and gleaming rather than covered in the usual refuse of the Third World and increasingly Third Worldified West
It is, in other words, the opposite of South Africa
It embraced excellence rather than equality, and prospered for it, creating a world in which one would like to live rather than some steaming, Third World hell
Further, it's a glimpse at the Network State concept
It is, of course, a locality, not a network
But it is a city-state, and in that shows what can be achieved when the focus is on success in a small, relatively likeminded grouping rather than on wealth redistribution across a vast, continent-sized country
It's a repudiation of the Twentieth Century in that respect; it embraces excellence rather than mere bigness and democratic scale
That too is part of a successful future; whatever we achieve will be because of excellence, not mere scale.
Fraternal networks, network states, Singapore-style city-states, all of it is potentially possible as the Westphalian system declines and something different emerges in its place
Notably, President Trump seems to recognize that such are the tools and pathways to success in the 21st century, as show by his "freedom city" concept
These aren't fully sovereign city-states, of course, but would be a space where excellence could be the goal rather than compliance with the Civil Rights Act and regulatory regime
In any case, what Lee Kuan Yew achieved with Singapore is a so far more permanent version of what was achieved in Rhodesia
Living standards and per-capita GDP are some of the highest on the continent, the city is now gleaming and futuristic rather than a fetid swamp, and the various constituent ethnic groups work (somewhat) together rather than being at each other's throats, as happens in its neighbors
He, in short, turned it from Third World to First
That's not to say it's without issues.
It is sterile, as has been noted, which can be offputting and tiresome
It is overcrowded; being an island is limiting, in many respects
And the TFR is a measly 1.04, making it one of the great "IQ shredders," as Steve Sailer put it, and potentially endangering its future. Even in a cosmopolitan city-state, immigration can't preserve a people
But there is reason to hope that those problems can be overcome because of its strengths
As an undemocratic center of excellence, it can draw talent, it can build, and some sterility is far preferable to looking like the Congo, or even the NYC subway
So, we'll see, but there's no reason for despair yet
There is much for us to learn from that, and much off which we can build
Namely, the lesson is that excellence, in any and all fields, matters. There's a reason Singapore, despite being a tiny island, is a beacon of prosperity, while Indonesia, a land of 100 million, is known for achieving nothing
Singapore, particularly under Lee, wanted to achieve. There was no messing around with mass democracy. Communism was crushed. Ethnic resentments were suppressed. Education was geared toward creating bright and competent citizens. In short, the usual gunk that clogs up countries was eliminated, and public investment used to grease the wheels of competence.
Indonesia, meanwhile, had ethnic feuds and attempts at communism. It achieves as little now as it did then.
So, how to emulate that?
That, broadly, is what @extradeadjcb and I discussed in today's podcast on fraternal networks
Yes, we're not the state. No, we can't build Orania in America. No, joining the Masons won't get you anywhere now
But we can find likeminded men of excellence and build a network alongside them.
Men of greatness, competence, and vitality are the future. Why? Because we need to build something new to prosper, not just bureaucratically maintain rotting systems. Because the social ties that bind and create communities died in the postwar world, and need to be rebuilt. Because most of the population is obviously incompetent, and isn't going to be able to figure out clean water, much less making it to Mars. Because what existing institutions there are want Global Zimbabwe, so the only way to do something notable is to EXIT them and build something new that obviates them. That is a task calling for networks of the competent and of the great, not for the grey and bureaucratic mass man
This isn't new. It is, in (very) broad strokes, how the Hospitallers (along with the Templars) became a leading force for centuries nearly a millennium ago.
But it is increasingly relevant as the system rots around us
And, of course, Dr. Bennett is the guy drawing attention to the TFR issue, which we talked about
The future belongs to those who show up, and right now Singapore's greatest issue is that the next generation isn't going to show up
The same is true of much of competent America
We need people interested in building dynasties again, and Lee Kuan Yew shows what can be accomplished when you think like that
Finally, Singapore's story is critical to learn because it is a reminder that you can build in the ruins
When Lee Kuan Yew began to transform his island, he did so in the face of not only near-total domestic poverty, but a collapsing British empire that couldn't and wouldn't protect him and his island. The Japanese had conquered, the British were a basket case, predatory neighbors looked on and licked their chops, and lesser men would have succumbed to despair and cried amongst the ruins
Lee, instead, built one of the most prosperous states in a hemisphere
So yes, the empire in which we live is declining. But that means that their is opportunity, particularly at the fringes, not that we should despair
NYC's communist is quoting Nelson Mandela, a communist terrorist known for murdering white civilians
As a reminder: Nelson Mandela was not a kindly leader as presented in Invictus. He did not want peace; he explicitly rejected it
A short 🧵on Mandela's terror campaign👇
For one, Mandela was in prison because he created a civilian-bombing terror group called "Spear of the Nation," and premised it on the success of Fidel Castro and Che Guevara in Cuba
He then carried out dozens of bombings on civilian farms and infrastructure
MK was backed by the Soviet Union, co-led by a Lithuanian communist named Joe Slovo, and the Mandela-era leadership was convicted of trying to violently overthrow the state
This was after Mandela convinced the ANC, in the '50s, to request arms and support from the People's Republic of China
Once in prison, Mandela refused to renounce violence
In fact, the South African government offered to release him from prison if he would simply pledge to not engage in terrorism anymore. He refused
He then smuggled messages to MK's new leadership through his murderous wife Winnie, and those messages helped them plan their attacks and tactics in the terror bombing campaign of the '70s and '80s, which led to hundreds of white civilians killed and thousands wounded
*I typed this incorrectly. It was this percentage per generation, not per year. However, the same study estimates that around the same percentage died at the scene of the crime, in some form or another, or while awaiting trial, which would boost it to 1-2% per generation
So yes, not per year, per generation. Still a lot of people and enough for a eugenic effect over time
All you think you know about King Leopold II and the Belgian Congo is wrong
You were told it was a hellish land of cruel exploitation. That's a lie
In reality, Congo was a colonial jewel, the atrocities didn't occur, and the Belgian years were the only good rule it's had🧵👇
First, it's important to note what state of things existed in what became the Belgian Congo before King Leopold II became its ruler
That tale is best told by Henry Stanley in his book, How I Found Livingstone, his tale of searching for Dr. Livingstone in the heart of Darkness
In it, he describes hell on a grand scale. Arab slavers from Zanzibar pillaged the anarchic territory, taking gangs of fettered slaves back with them to be castrated and sold to the Arab slave market
The interior, when not being raided by Arabs, was in a state of horrid chaos. Random violence, cannibals, the ever-present threat of famine, and all the rest we think of when we think of pre-colonial Africa is what life was like in the Congo. Rotting vegetation, insect-infested huts, farms barely maintaining subsistence, and tribes raiding each other and explorers were the basic aspects of life in the pre-Belgian world
In short, life before the Belgians was like life in the Stone Age: nasty, brutish, and short, with the only law being the law of the jungle
Stanley and Livingstone did much to expose this state of things, and it was the greedy, exploitative traders who followed in their wake, before Leopold and the Belgians, that are recorded by Conrad in his The Heart of Darkness
It was about a decade and a half later that, during the Berlin Conference, King Leopold II was granted control of the area now knows as the Democratic Republic of the Congo
He controlled it through the Congo Free State, a private attempt he founded and fully owned, with the goal of colonizing and bring order to the anarchic territory
To do so, he started sending to the state Belgian officers and administrators. They, along with a bevy of monks, nuns, and traders, were the ones who set out to turn the anarchic Congo into a well-administered area that turned from animist paganism to Christianity while becoming prosperous and stable
The military/police arm of that rule was the Force Publique, which was mainly officered by Belgians but otherwise consisted of natives allied with the Congo Free State. They protected the nuns, protected the traders, kept out the Arab slavers from Zanzibar, and generally tried to first impose and then maintain order
South Africa is back in the news because of its anarcho-tyranny and Mugabe-style land expropriation
Missed is that this is Mandela's vision
The ANC's "National Democratic Revolution" concept—using liberalism to establish communism—is going exactly as he planned & hoped for🧵👇
"National Democratic Revolution" (NDR), is originally a Soviet concept that was adopted and built upon by the South African communists, particularly the ruling ANC regime, to suit their unique situation and goal
Their goal, as one might expect of an anti-colonial communist group, is race communism of the sort seen in Zimbabwe under Mugabe
Their unique situation, however, was that they had the world's sympathy and were expected to create the "Rainbow Nation" rather than just another nominally democratic hellhole
Hence, the NDR concept. By slowly boiling the frog, they could use the slogans and methods of liberalism to first establish socialism, and then, from ther,e move to communism
It's that final step we're seeing now, and they might not have boiled the frog slowly enough, as they're getting more resistance than was expected
Still, it's gotten them this far, so it's worth reviewing
The American left is embracing race communism of the sort that destroyed South Africa + Rhodesia
Here, e.g., the Chicago mayor admits to anti-white racism in permitting: “Every dime [blacks] were robbed of, I’ll make sure is returned two- or threefold”
Here's what's coming🧵👇
Mayor Johnson's spewed absurdities are, essentially, the same inane nonsense the African communists pushed before destroying their countries
In South Africa, Mandela's ANC has long insisted that the white farmers "stole" the land from blacks, and thus it needs to be "returned" to them
Much the same was true of Mugabe's thuggery in Zimbabwe, where he and his cronies insisted that "land reform" (farmland expropriation) was a necessity because the white farmers had "stolen" the land when they founded Rhodesia
In every case, it was absurd: the supposed "thieves" built everything that existed, they didn't steal it
South Africa is a great example. When the progenitors of the Afrikaners arrived in 1654, they found a nearly uninhabited land, and those few Khoisan there were roving pastoralists who had settled nothing. The Afrikaners then built South Africa from the ground up, turning an untamed wilderness into a thriving colony with hugely successful farms. They gradually marched to the north and west, settling the land as they went and eventually finding the Xhosa and Zulu, both of whom arrived in what's now South Africa from the north well after the Afrikaners did. Once again, it was the Afrikaners who built civilization, with their labor and hands, in that mostly untamed land. Over the mid-19th to mid-20th century, Anglo settlers and capital poured in as well, helping build civilization where none had formerly existed in South Africa
Rhodesia was much the same thing. The British South Africa Company did, admittedly, find the Matabele and Shona in what became Rhodesia when settling the territory began. But agriculture was limited. No cities, roads, railroads, or the like existed. Populations were limited and sparse. Anglos then poured in and settled it, turning veldt into farms, building cities on open land, and gradually raising civilization on land where little formerly existed. Further, what land the BSAC obtained, the land on which civilization was built, was bought from the Matabele, not "stolen."
Well, here's what prominent SA politicians say: "We will k*ll white women, we will k*ll white children, and we will even k*ll your pets"
Importantly, this violence is part of Mandela's legacy and happened because of American policy 🧵👇
This should be quite clear as the Afrikaner refugee situation heats up
For example, an ANC (Mandela's party, long aided by the Soviets) hack calling himself "Staling" released this statement about Trump's refugee program and demanded the Afrikaners stay so that they can face "accountability" for "historic privilege"
What does "accountablity" mean in this situation?
It means he wants them to be slain in some of the sickest, most horrific ways imaginable
This is what the farm murders and home invasions across South Africa are: aided by the government (the military, for example, provides them with signal jammers), thugs r*pe, m*rder, and k!ll Boers in their homes
The farm attacks are almost always black on white, almost always involve sexual assault, and frequently involve murder. The same is true of home invasions in urban zones, what few are left in the years after Mandela