Chris Martenson And James Howard Kunstler Explain How "The World is Going to Get Rounder and Bigger Again"

Tyler Durden's picture

"Straight Talk" features thinking from notable minds the audience has indicated it wants to learn more about. Readers submit the questions they want addressed and our guests take their best crack at answering. The comments and opinions expressed by our guests are their own.

This week's Straight Talk contributor is James Howard Kunstler, author and social critic. His better-known works include The Long Emergency, in which he argues that declining oil production will result in the decline of modern industrialized society and compel Americans to return to smaller-scale, localized, semi-agrarian communities; World Made By Hand and its sequel, The Witch of Hebron, all published by The Atlantic Monthly Press. He writes a weekly blog is also a leading proponent of the movement known as "New Urbanism."


1. When will the average US citizen wake up to the perils of peak oil?

JHK:  When a crisis comparable to the 1973 OPEC embargo -- with lines at the filling stations and hefty price-hikes --  whaps them upside the head. For now, what I call the psychology of previous investment is a massive impediment to the public's ability to think clearly. By this I mean mainly our sunk costs in suburbia, including all its furnishings and accessories. That's where we put so much of our "wealth" over the past sixty years. I regard these as tragic mis-investments, of course, because the wealth has gone into a living arrangement that has no future. The housing bubble crash is greatly aggravating the problem, because it is de-valuing the whole kit-and-kaboodle. But the net effect for now is only to generate more anxiety among the public, which leads to more confusion, more cognitive dissonance, more static in the collective imagination, and more political noise -- in short, more obstacles to clear thinking. 

2. There seems to be no political will to tackle the reality of peak oil. What might tip that balance (before we hit the proverbial wall)?

JHK:  Leadership in America has been abysmal on these issues -- and not just in politics, but in business, media, education, the enviro community, even the clergy. For the politicians, I have to suppose that the implications of peak oil are just too painful to face. They simply do not compute into any winning formula. They won't go near it.

I'm quite convinced that Dick Cheney and George Bush were informed about the oil situation, in particular its relation to the national defense. After all, Robert Hirsch arrived on the scene loudly in 2005 with his report, commissioned by the US Department of Energy, which was quickly suppressed because its conclusions were so stark. Bush made occasional remarks about our "dependence on foreign oil" but he didn't have the guts to spell it out further, and he was a tool of Big Oil, after all, which has run a PR campaign for ten years denying the peak oil story. Anyway, he didn't want to interrupt the fabulous credit-driven boom of the years leading to his final months in office, when things really did go south.

Obama is another story, of course. He couldn't be so poorly informed as to not know about peak oil in most of its contours and implications, especially vis-a-vis the military, which has issued more than one report while he's been in office. So I conclude that he is a kind of charming bounder. I'm not necessarily sorry I voted for him, because I think McCain would have been worse, entwined as he is with the lunatic right-wing and its toxic aura of paranoid unreality. 

It's unclear whether the media is too dumb to get the complexities of our oil predicament, or if they are just bought-off lackeys of the various corporate interests. Probably a combo on that. It is rather hard to understand, for instance, the vapidity of The New York Times -- in particular its op-ed pundits, Krugman, Friedman, Brooks. The Times's straight reporting on the oil scene has been scant and fatuous. The Wall Street Journal, ditto. TV news operates in its own special sewage canal of idiocy, so one might not expect much from there.

Since business in America has resolved more and more into a set of rackets, one can't expect plain-dealing from that sector these days.

I've seen the failure of the environmental community up close. Two years in a row at the Aspen Environmental Forum, I listened to the cream of the Green movement rhapsodize over all the cool new "green" ways you can run cars other than on gasoline. You see, their base assumption -- like everyone else in this society -- is that driving cars incessantly is a God-given entitlement. They were in a techno-rapture over electric cars, bio-diesel, and so on. They didn't once mention walkable communities or public transit. They're just not into it. I consider their position utterly disgraceful. 

The clergy is an interesting case. Notice especially how the Sunbelt born-again crowd are perhaps the staunchest defenders of suburbia -- and everything that goes with it, including car dependency and and huge volumes of oil imports from unreliable foreign nations. They conflate suburbia with the constitution and Jesus and, really, their belief system is so incoherent and ridiculous that it must really frighten the educated folk of other nations who see how we carry on. 

3. If you were President and had free reign, what would be your energy plan?


  • I would commence a public debate on whether we go forward with a nuclear power program, to weigh the hazards involved -- but, frankly, there may be no other ways to keep the lights on in a decade or so. It may turn out that we are too short of capital to carry out such a program, or our society may be too disorderly in the years ahead to run it, or we may decide the hazards are not worth it, but the discussion must start now.
  • I would direct major capital resources to repairing the conventional passenger railroads in the US, because commercial aviation as we know it will not continue another ten years, and ditto Happy Motoring, and this is a big continent-sized nation. If we don't get regular rail running, we may not be able to go anywhere. We should just put aside our fantasies about high-speed rail or mag-lev. We're too broke for that, and we need to temper our techno-grandiosity. But, believe me, Americans will be deliriously happy ten years from now if they can go from Des Moines to Chicago at 80mph on-time. During the Obama years, we've stupidly poured our dwindling capital resources into building more highways. This foolishness has got to stop. I would promote public transit at the smaller municipal scale as well, to go with regular rail.
  • I'd begin the task of rehabilitating our inland waterways so we can move more goods around the nation by boat -- and in particular the port facilities that have been mostly removed in places like St. Louis and Cincinnati and around the Great Lakes.
  • I would put an emphasis on walkable communities. I would prepare the nation for the possibility of gasoline rationing, since events could shove us into criticality at any time.
  • I would begin closing down scores of unnecessary overseas military bases and I would terminate the nation-building project in Afghanistan since there is no possibility that we can control the terrain or the population there for anything more than the shortest run.
  • I would direct the Attorney General of the US to mount investigations of the Bank of America, JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, and other big banks in connection with the massive swindles and frauds in house lending and the securitization of mortgages -- because the rule of law requires that somebody be held accountable for the demolition of the banking system.
4. Now take out your crystal ball. What is the most likely scenario you see playing out in global energy supplies over the next few decades?

JHK:  I see the USA getting blind-sided by events. We import nearly three-quarters of the oil we use and much of it comes from very dodgy places. The ideas derived from Jeff Brown's Export Land Theory tell us that oil export rates are certain to go down very steeply and soon. Before long, exporting nations will have to ask themselves whether they ought to keep some of their oil around for their own people.

In the meantime, China is very busy spending its foreign exchange reserves on "favored customer" oil contracts, more or less cornering a lot of the market. I think that will lead to conflict between them and us. We may even invoke the Monroe Doctrine over Chinese oil purchases out of Canada.

Also meanwhile, we'll see the feedback loop of demand destruction leading to supply destruction as the oil industry becomes starved of capital to get at new production to offset worldwide depletions, and that will result in wildly gyrating oil prices -- all of which will shove the global oil industry -- production and markets -- into fatal instability. Nicole Foss's rap on this dynamic is an excellent reference.

The prospects for gross geopolitical mischief around this are huge, of course, meaning war in some shape or form -- and it will clearly be a war over dwindling resources. Also, of course, you can't overstate the potential for disorder in the Middle East. The king of Saudi Arabia is well over 80 years old now and his successor is also old and ill. I'd suggest we may see a Shia uprising on the western rim of the Persian Gulf (that is, the Arabian side) that would bring down the Saud royal family and ignite a major struggle all over the region. 

There is currently a lot of hoopla over shale gas in the USA, but I think that will disappoint us, since it requires gigantic ongoing capital investment, and capital will be in ever-shorter supply. And this is not to mention the other problems and hazards associated with shale gas "fracking," such as the extreme forms of groundwater pollution and cancer clusters.

Bottom line: in ten years or fewer the USA will be starved for energy resources and probably on its ass in one way or another.

5. The economy's a mess.  What's the best possible outcome to this and how does it come about?

JHK:  The best possible outcome would be a peaceful re-set to a lower scale of activity -- the whole downscaling and re-localization package. It's hard to see that happening smoothy.

It will be very painful because we're talking about liquidation and de-leveraging beyond even Great Depression levels. We have to allow a clearing of mis-investment. Unfortunately, this means not just the "toxic" paper from the colossal frauds and swindles of Wall Street but much of the infrastructure of suburbia itself, which is losing value now even despite massive government efforts to prop up house prices and pretend that losses in commercial real estate haven't occurred. That clearing process is so tremendous that it is hard to imagine a way that it could occur without leading to gross political disorder -- including the possible breakup of the USA into smaller autonomous regions. We're looking at institutional failure at never-before-imagined levels: pensions and social security lost, insurance companies and banks collapsing, the medical system in disarray, really the whole social safety net and beyond just dissolving. This is a comprehensive economic collapse beyond the scale even of the Soviet collapse which, Dmitry Orlov tells us, at least allowed people to stay in their homes and get around on public transit when all else failed.

One much-fretted-over outcome is authoritarian government in the USA. We can see the larval stage of that now with the tea baggers and the theocratic right-wing and a Republican Party that has made itself hostage to the John Birch Society -- but I maintain, as I wrote in The Long Emergency, that it's more likely the federal government will become impotent and ineffectual, and therefore unable to carry out a "corn-pone Nazi" program, even if such characters got a hold of the offices.

In any case, America will be faced with rebuilding all the major pieces of its economy at a lower scale: farming, commerce, transportation, education, banking, you name it. This re-set will occur naturally -- if we don't blow ourselves to Kingdom Come -- but there's no telling how long the process might take. We do know that following the collapse of Rome, Western Europe endured nearly a thousand years of relative hardship. I'd add that societies are essentially emergent organisms and that this economic re-set would therefore be an emergent phenomenon -- not something that required centralized planning or anything like it.

One notable side effect of all this will be a "time out" from technological innovation, which is destroying the ecosystem of the planet Earth, our only home. The human race needs a time out from all this techno-magic-mischief, a period to reflect on what we've done and how we ought to behave with this stuff. I don't even know for sure whether it's a time out or a game-over for technology, and I'm not convinced that we need to know at this point.

6. What steps are you currently taking in preparations for the upcoming “post-peak” years? What do you advise to those simply looking to protect the purchasing power of their current wealth?

JHK:  Well, at 62 I've already outlived Babe Ruth, Mozart, Abe Lincoln, and George Gershwin,  so however long I go from here is "gravy."  But I do all I can to maintain good health. I eat mostly plants, as Michael Pollan would say. I get a lot of exercise. I lead a purposeful daily life. I stay current with the dentist. I made the formative decision of where-to-live over thirty years ago when I settled in a "main street" small town in upstate New York. My surplus wealth is invested for the moment in hard gold, the Sprott Physical fund, Australian and Canadian short term bond funds (cash equivalent), and Potash mining. I am renting my dwelling, sitting out the housing collapse. I acquired the NY State handgun permit (not so easy). I have some tubs of brown rice, lentils, and curry powder, etc., stashed away. Alas, I didn't have the capital twenty years ago to get hold of forty acres and a mule -- but that's not a bad idea for other people.

7. Are you able to tell (either based on your website viewership or book sales, or from any other source) in which parts of the country/population your teachings are gaining the most traction?

JHK:  My only index of that is the size and mood of audiences where I speak around the country. The Pacific Northwest is always a lively spot. The people who show up are intelligent, informed, and interested. In Southern California I seem to be utterly unknown. Parts of the Midwest, such as Wisconsin and Minnesota, seem to be organizing for a different economy, but other parts (rural Illinois, Indiana, Ohio) are sheer zombie-land. New York City and Washington exist in bubble-fantasylands of their own. Rural New England is pretty peak oil aware, though the Boston-Cambridge hub is locked into transports of techno-rapture, probably due to the techno-grandiose culture of MIT. The baleful influence of Harvard shows up in the urban design and architecture field, where they are preoccupied with narcissistic careerism rather than repairing the human habitat. Dixieland is hopeless, what with their thrall to the born-agains and the misfortunes of their demographic (namely, "Cracker Culture" which celebrates ignorance and violence). I don't follow my book sales, frankly, and my website manager knows more about the activity on my site than I do.

8. You speak to a lot of audiences and groups.  What has shifted over the years and what, if anything, gives you hope in those trends?

JHK:  I must tell you that I think almost nothing has shifted among the body politic except perhaps the levels of angst and desperation for individual citizens brought on by personal calamity involving job losses, debt, house repossession, family breakup, and related effects of our economic collapse. Meanwhile the distractions from all this pain and stress are ever more moronic -- Dancing with the Stars starring Bristol Palin -- can it get any worse?

Mr. Obama, who I voted for, has done almost nothing to address our energy predicament, and the 2200-page financial regulation bill he signed does little to reform the problems in capital finance -- so, here we are eight months after Fin-Reg entering another stage of the banking crisis. We are still absolutely sleepwalking into the future.

9. It seems inevitable that the suburbs (with 60-mile commutes) and places like LA will suffer badly in a peak oil future.  Do you still hold the view that some regions are going to fare substantially better than others?

JHK:  It ought to be self-evident. I mean, compare Phoenix and Portland, Oregon. Phoenix is utterly toast in a few years. They can't grow any food there without expensive and heroic irrigation. They have water problems. They're slaves to their cars. They're in a place where even the hamburger flippers need air-conditioning to survive. It's quite hopeless there. Portland, on the other hand, has turned itself into one of the finest walkable cities in the USA and the Willamette River Valley is one of the most productive farming micro-regions in the world. Human beings will continue to live and thrive to some extent there. Similarly, I think the Great Lakes region is undervalued these days. It is whole lot of good ag land surrounded by the world's most extensive inland sea -- kind of a Mediterranean of fresh water. I remain pessimistic about Dixieland, which I think will be prone to violence and political disorder. In the longer run I believe it will become what it was before World War 2: an agricultural backwater. But, really, everybody in every region of the country will be touched by the problems of the long emergency.

10. What question didn’t we ask, but should have? What’s your answer?

JHK:  Will China dominate the world further into the 21st Century?  

A lot of people think so. I'm not so sure about that. They have problems that are orders of magnitude greater than ours with population overshoot, dwindling fresh water, industrial pollution, relatively little oil of their own, and legitimacy of governance. They've become net food importers.

We look at them and their recent accomplishments in awe -- and they've come a long way from the point thirty years ago when most Chinese lived like it was the twelfth century. But they came to the industrial fiesta very late. They are making some rather dumb choices -- like, trying to get their whole new middle class in cars on freeways, putting up thousands of skyscrapers. Their banking system is possibly more corrupt and dysfunctional than ours -- since it's run by the state, with very poor accountability for lending. As a Baby Boomer, I well remember China's psychotic break of the 1960s, when the country went cuckoo under the elderly, ailing, paranoid Mao Tse-Tung -- which is to say, they're capable of flipping out on the grand scale under stress. They are reaching out these days in a resource grab using their accumulated foreign exchange reserves. At some future time -- say, if the global banking system implodes, and their forex reserves lose value -- I wonder if they will reach out militarily for resources, and how the world might react.

In any case, I take issue with the Tom Friedman notion that the world has become permanently flat. The world is going to get rounder and bigger again. We'll discover -- surprise! -- that the global economy was a set of transient economic relations that obtained only because of a half century of cheap energy and relative peace between the big nations. Ahead now, I think you'll see the big nations shrink back into their own corners of the world. I'm not saying we'll see no international trade, but it will be nothing like the  conveyer belt from China to WalMart that we've known the last few decades. And the prospects for conflict are very very high.



If you have not yet seen the other articles in this series, you can find them here: readers can submit their preferences for future Straight Talk participants, as well as questions to ask them, via the Straight Talk forum.



Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Citxmech's picture

Regarding Frank Herbert, a science fiction writer:  (from wiki) "[Herbert's]career as a novelist began with the publication of The Dragon in the Sea in 1955, where he used the environment of a 21st century submarine as a means to explore sanity and madness. The book predicted worldwide conflicts over oil consumption and production."

Here's another quote from an actual scientist of some regard:

"It has often been said that, if the human species fails to make a go of it here on Earth, some other species will take over the running. In the sense of developing high intelligence this is not correct. We have, or soon will have, exhausted the necessary physical prerequisites so far as this planet is concerned. With coal gone, oil gone, high-grade metallic ores gone, no species however competent can make the long climb from primitive conditions to high-level technology. This is a one-shot affair. If we fail, this planetary system fails so far as intelligence is concerned. The same will be true of other planetary systems. On each of them there will be one chance, and one chance only. (Hoyle, 1964)"

It is a fallacy to argue that because science has "saved us" in the past, that it will continue to be able to do so inperpetuity.

Regardless of what advances may, or may not be on the horizon, I would trust what the actual scientist who are supposed to come up with said paradigm-shifting advances have to say on the subject, rather than hopefuls with little real training in the sciences.

As I stated before in another thread, my scientist friends (wife included) are all substantially more worried about our future than my non-scientist friends who have the audacity to lay the ever more difficult burden of "fixing things" on their shoulders. 

 This should be informative.

trav7777's picture


Anyway, movie quotes aside, I like your scifi writer's total head up ass polyanna shit.  It makes me weep, man, it really does.

Feel free to walk around with your head in the clouds dreaming up antigravity while those of us with ACTUAL engineering degrees understand that there is NO WAY out of the 2nd Law.

You don't have a solution; you have a lot of crazy bullshit, but that's ok.  We need crazy bullshitters like you, as it takes all kinds in the village.

Your dipshit scifi writer saw no laws that were unchanging?  Then, to be totally blunt, HE'S AN IDIOT with NO SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE whatsoever.  Physical laws are physical laws, whether or not his dumb ass saw them.

The laws of motion haven't changed in several hundred years; tweaked by Relativity, yes, but changed?  Swept away?  NO.  For all intents and purposes F STILL = MA.

This might surprise you but the way shit works is governed by physical laws which do not change.  Atoms are still bound by the same forces as they were 10 billion years ago and will be 10 billion from now.

What really is insignificant is all this stupid human's really arrogance more than anything else.  Its pinnacle appears to be your notion that you have solutions for everything.  Amazingly, nobody is taking you up on them.

Wyndtunnel's picture

+666  Trav, I seriously love your aggressive stance... Keep up the good work!!  

Hulk's picture

Resonant Storage and Extraction Systems.

Like our bodies. ATP replication system. But mechanical.

The possibilities if we allow ourselves to be bold, are limitle..


Complete and utter nonsense...I suggest you grab your shoelaces and try and place your feet on the ceiling...

Econolingus's picture

"As oil runs out,we will transition to cheaper sources of energy."  Because, of course, capitalism dictates that the most expensive system inputs be utilized first. 

Your argument fails from its premise, and your conclusion is moronic:  "space colonization"?  Are you serious?  And this is necessary why?

1100-TACTICAL-12's picture

AS oil runs we will transition, but cheaper I think not... The only thing's getting cheaper will be whores & politicians....

the rookie cynic's picture

Cheap energy is gone. No doubt some of the energy sources you site will contribute eventually, but it's not going to be enough. Not nearly enough.

I posted this later in thread, but I wanted to make sure tmosley saw it:


Right now alternative/renewable energy sources produce about 9 quadrillion BTUs a year. Sounds like a lot right? Not!

Estimates are that by 2035 we’ll need 739 quadrillion BTUs to sustain world population at that time. 

Economically recoverable oil will be mostly depleted by then I think. We won’t make up the shortfall without a radical change in energy policy and production.

Go here for summary of the energy situation with real numbers.

Perhaps a better heading for the discussion is "Peak Energy".  Fossil fuels represent millions of years of collected solar energy - a windfall of monumental proportions. Replacing that will be a miracle (i.e. fusion).

Peak oil is an important issue. Deny it at your peril.

GoinFawr's picture

Totally agree with you NOTW777, they all should have voted for Ralph Nader. That was your point, right?

High Plains Drifter's picture

Peak oil? Good grief Kunstler, is that all you got?  Give me a break. The United States has enough oil to last it for hundreds of years. Why don't you talk about the FED Kunstler?  Does it hurt real bad, knowing that most if not all of the damage is being done by members of your tribe?  I bet it does. But that is ok. We will deal with it. Do we have any other choice?  No.

TumblingDice's picture

The United States has enough oil to last it for hundreds of years.

The reserves/production ratio for the US is ten years. The rpr for the world is 40 years. Just because someone is wrongly situated on one side of the debate, like this clown apparently being a pro fed dolt, it doesn't mean that the content of his ideas is wrong. Bernie Sanders comes to mind. The self proclaimed socialist and a silly guy all in all, lead an audit of the fed in the Senate.

High Plains Drifter's picture

Sir, we have enough oil at the North Slope of Alaska to last us from that plac alone for 200 years. Guess who owns that oil production? Can you say BHP? I knew you could. Ever heard of them?  They are Rothschild company. They recently in the last few years found huge oil bearing deposits in the North Dakota area. Have you heard much about this? Well of course not. Google it and read about it. Not to mention the Gulf of Mexico. Did you forget the gusher that was out there a few short months ago? There is more oil in the gulf of Mexico than in Saudi Arabia. Sorry, but the oil shortage is a scam. I respectfully disagree with the oil shortage argument.

In my opinion, after reading about this, is that oil does not come from fossils. The problem in the gulf is that the oil is located at very difficult depths with the obvious problems that go with discoveries at those depths.

peak oil scam

The defense rest.

TumblingDice's picture

The goofy 400 billion barrels estimate cited in your first link was never peer reviewed. Here is the latest USGS assesment (~3.65 billion barrels)

The quality of the oil you are talking about is just as important as quanity. We can have the biggest surveyed reserves in the world but if the oil is unreachable/too heavy then it is really of little use. If we spend more energy talking it out, refining it and transporting it then its useless. Shale oil is shitty in general. It is basically a good way to convert energy produced by coal or nat gas into gasoline but otherwise it is a waste.

Just look at US oil production:

then compare that chart with world oil production. It is the front end of a bell curve, just like US production was 1920s to 1970s.

trav7777's picture

wow.  I thought it was impossible for someone to be as clueless as you are.  I was wrong.

That you believe this shit you say is utterly amazing.

Reserves do not matter, even your complete bullshit reserves figures.  Flow matters, and more critically net barrels or EROI.

Wow...a gusher in the GOM means that oil production will rise forever.  JFC, how do you get to that conclusion from a blowout spill in the GOM?

It doesn't matter how much oil is THERE, moron, it only matters at the rate we can EXTRACT IT.

Oil consumption is a RATE, ok?

trav7777's picture

JFC, you're ignorant.

The US produces 5-6mbpd, we consume around 18 right now.

This means that the US has enough domestic production - WHICH IS FALLING AND HAS BEEN SINCE WE PEAKED IN 1970 - to last about 1/3 of any given DAY.

trav7777's picture

Jewms Kunstler is no different in that regard.

I find it laughably odd that he IMPUTES such knowledge to Obama, when the man is very obviously utterly fucking clueless.

Don't EVER confuse erudition for intelligence.  True, they tend to correlate, but one does not prove the other.  And don't assume people know things, when they appear NOT TO.  Downing Effect in play with Jewms.

Jewms is most afraid, if you read his blog, of an anti-jew purge, the so called "cornpone Nazis" that he thinks all non liberal southerners are.  Ironically he has a gun permit to CARRY when he derides the south and all its guns rather frequently.  Basically he is deriding anglosaxon whites who in his mind are all seething racists and violent cretins.

See, Jewms Kunstler can see that 95% of the bankster oligarchs are his cousins and he knows what happened when they collapsed the USSR and took over as the plutocracy there.  Wasn't long before a NATIONALIST took over and these crooks either ended up jailed or running to Israel.  Putin didn't exactly break out the zyklon B, he fairly targeted those who were raping the nation.

Kunstler wants a world according to his design, and he does have some good ideas.  But his ethnicity is a CONSTANT filter to his ability to see the world correctly.

MsCreant's picture


Kunstler wants a world according to his design, and he does have some good ideas.  But his ethnicity is a CONSTANT filter to his ability to see the world correctly. 

I hate your jew hating, you are too smart for it, it puzzles me. But on this, I think you are right.

trav7777's picture

Let's talk about it then:  your basic assumption is incorrect.

I say what I say to provoke a reaction by the use of what some refer to as "hate facts."  In fact, I am speaking the truth and I do so in a way as to provoke a pavlovian response in the audience.

Do me this favor:  review my statements of fact in the abstract.  If you cannot take issue with them, but you still feel uncomfortable reading them, then the problem is not with the facts, it is with you.

I will tell you that ANYONE should have a problem with a notoriously nepotistic and ethnocentric group having a stranglehold on the financial and media sectors.  Do you dispute this?

But, should I attach "jew" to this statement, suddenly, it's a problem, isn't it?  You've been conditioned...

citationneeded's picture

May I ask how many jews you know?

I can only speak for myself. I am a 23 year old with a desk job and no power, no family connections, no access to the jewsih elite (which exist and whom I find quite irratating).

You see, would you at least concede that there are many people who are Jewish, have no power over the circumstances, and therefore have fates that are irrevocably tied to how their "tribe" is perceived?


If I have not personally harmed you, or anyone for that manner, and there are people who blame me for their problems, am I not allowed to be concered?

trav7777's picture

why does my personal relationship with jews matter?

You stipulate the existance of the elite.  Good.

I, of course, would concede that many jews are as irrelevant as anybody else.

But, again, I highlighted that Putin did not purge "jews," he purged oligarchs that happened to be dominated by jews.  The people who were not involved were not messed with.

Who is blaming YOU for any problems?  I have not pointed any blame at those other than who are responsible.

You need to differentiate who *I* say is responsible from Kunstler's "corn pone" demagoguery.  Jewms's fear is that people will realize how many of the Fed board is jewish, how the filthy media is dominated by jews, and the racebaiting "advocacy" groups are jewish run and funded and we might have another holocaust.

I think that's a FAIR fear.  The SOLUTION however is not to pretend that white people are all genocidal maniacs.  It's like people being profiled because they match the characteristics of those who have committed crimes.  Whose fault is it?  Is it the profiler or ALL the people who committed the crimes?

The solution is not to pretend that jews don't dominate these parasitical industries, the solution, as I've said to jews that I know, is for JEWS THEMSELVES to clean up their fucking act before some shit happens that they ain't gonna like.

You say you have not harmed "me" but then that there are "people" who blame you.  This is a classic strawman.  I have not blamed you.  So are you concerned about ME or about "people"?

citationneeded's picture

Thank you for the explanation.


I must say, I did not mean to use the strawman fallacy. It is hard when one feels threatened to separate those thoughts. When I read what you write, I am reminded of Kevin MacDonald and TOQ and all that stuff. And the material there varies widely, so I have the pavlovian response, as you put it.


However, when you say things like "We have too many jews", a statement you have made in the past, and then also admit that most jews are irrelevant, my fear starts to kick in and the response ensues.

trav7777's picture

we have too many jews in finance and media who are wicked people.  I've never said we just plain have too many jews.  But we could surely use more diversity in media, finance, and race hustling.  Ok, maybe we could do without that last one.

It's funny how lack of diversity isn't an issue except if it's anglosaxon dominance of an industry.

As far as Kevin MacDonald, I've read some of his work and I think he is factually fair.  At some point, let's break this down real easy here...jews need to begin to really understand why people historically haven't liked them.  The REAL reasons.  Start with why jews can't stand other jews and work from there.

Likewise, blacks should understand why people are afraid of them.  And whites should understand why asians consider them barbarians and whatnot.  Pretending that the ENTIRE lot of the "other" is utterly irrational, crazy, stupid...look, it's NEVER not you just everybody else.

It does nobody any good to think the Holocaust was caused by some kind of irrational hatred without merit.  That is a whitewash.  It's no more true than that Hutus just decided for no reason to slaughter every Tutsi they could find.

SURE, most of the victims were innocent...but that's not the point.  The point is the root cause.  However, as soon as you go down the road away from "the victim was innocent in the absolute" you start uttering "hate facts."  Someone will chime in with the cloture word "racist" to get you back toeing the line of orthodoxy.

Kunstler is smart enough to KNOW, though he keeps his cards close, WHY the Holocaust happened and he fears the parallels to today.  Why should he fear them if the whole thing had no cause and was reasonless?  In fact, in his blogs he has wondered aloud about what happens when them cornpone natzis wake up to the fact that the power on the Street is 95% jewish.  He's worried that it will be he who is on the train arriving at the Treblinka of the future looking at a nonfunctioning clock handwound to the present time.

Facts should not be threatening...they are just facts.

If people were to call me an asshole...I might ask why they say that but I'm not going to dispute it.  Say I can be aggressive, say that I like conflict or to push buttons...sure.  I appear to be relatively alone in that self-awareness.

You don't have anything to fear from me as I am rare in being able to separate "the perpetrators are jews" from "jews are the perpetrators"...unfortunately, most are not.

kiwidor's picture

You have come to exactly the same conclusion I have -> they need to clean up their act before we have to.

But I have also concluded  that you cannot easily convert a genome. 

trav7777's picture

I suppose.

But, I have some sympathy for jews...K. MacDonald describes some fair typical characteristics of aggressive interpersonal behavior, high IQ, etc...that I happen to share.

However, I don't blame regular people for disliking these things.  I recognize that they aren't likeable, that I don't "play well in groups," etc.  It is what it is.

However, on the flipside, it is NOT ACCIDENT that the positions of significance in finance and media are nearly 100% jewish.  It's not.  To claim that this is for reasons other than nepotism is absurd in the extreme.  There are ample smart-enough anglosaxons that it is not jewish IQ dominance either.  One really need only look at the history of invention and science to see that it was dominated by Europeans from Tesla, a slav, to Mendeleev, to Lavoisier, to Newton.  Jews disproportionate as they do in high IQ; I've got no problem with this.  But a 95% jewish FRB is a sign of nepotism, plain and simple.

Hell there are posters to this forum who've described what many of us have seen, that the tribe sticks together.

I say, so what?  Ok, so perhaps it is time for every "group" to themselves, what, like in prison?  I mean I watched some prison tattoo show last night talking about "white supremacist" prison gangs.  Newsflash...they aren't white supremacists.  They are a gang that banded together along ethnic lines just as black and latino gangs do in the joint.  If you don't band together, you will be cut off and killed.  These criminals aren't SMART ENOUGH to consider themselves supreme at anything and they all admit they joined the AB because on day one a black gang beat the shit out of them.

I really would hope that someday humanity can get beyond all this tribalist shit.  As of now, everyone tribes up except WASPs, because that is RACISM.  We need to pick either this tribal shit for everyone or else no tribalism for anyone and start judging people on individual merit.

Tutsis formed the disproportionate dominant group in the Rwandan ruling class.  They were backed by certain colonial powers.  They tended to be taller and lighter skinned than the Hutu majority.  I mean, easy shit here, DO THE MATH.  Obviously, among the 1% that controlled the country, the vast majority were Tutsis.  Most tutsis were not in that 1% of the population that controlled, but when TSHTF, facts go out the window.  It became US against THEM.  This is how holocausts happen

Wyndtunnel's picture

Well spoken Trav.  Well spoken.  People can't handle the truth... We're all doomed to die alone on this shit hole we call Earth anyways...  Too bad. There really is some great scenery here. I have to admit that I do enjoy the madness... It amuses me that despite being so certain of their supremacy and the specialness of their God given mandate to rule the Earth that the vast majority of people on the planet will perish without really ever being much more conscious than a plant that follows the sun.  That's all most of us do really.. We follow the heat. We eat, we fuck, we shit. We sleep. We kill each other and we die.  Everything else is just filler.

mkkby's picture

Trav, the problem with you is you can speak intelligently about finance and science, then you turn retard and spout racism.  Yes, you are WRONG, because you are painting large, annonymous groups with a broad brush.  There are millions of jews and perhaps a handful are your elitists.  And you know it so don't even bother arguing.

trav7777's picture

Racism?  LOL.

Where?  I painted with a brush where?

Salivate some more for me, dog.  Your bell is ringing.

Andy Lewis's picture

Fuck off and die, Nazi filth.

augmister's picture

There is anti-Semitism in the world because of Jews like Kunt-sler, Bernanke, Rubin and Summers....

kiwidor's picture

There's no hatred in there at all, just observation.  Which does give weight to the assertion that you have been conditioned, MsCreant.

More disturbing is that you associate Trav's superior intelligence with some kind of convenience filter ->because he is smart, he should fall for the jew propaganda. 

While there are groups (like skinheads) who are populated by normal to below average IQ'rs, most people I know who have recognised the collective pathological behaviour of jews are in the  =>2 SD range on the general reasoning tests, and these are the folks jews love to hate. 

If you really want to get a grip on the subject, you should read Kevin MacDonald's work.  


BobPaulson's picture

Though I'm against his highly biased and pro-Israeli stance, I don't think your argument is assisted by anti-Jewish comments. Seriously, many of the things you say make sense but when you mix it with talk that sounds like it's from the 30's, frankly I worry. I worry that the current anti-bank sentiment could be twisted (again) into something racist and then end up not fixing the banking corruption issues.

trav7777's picture

Please do me a favor, then...point out SPECIFICALLY the anti-jewish statements I made in the above-referenced argument.

After you fail to do so, because there actually weren't any, please reflect on how your own conditioning led you to believe that I was making anti-jewish statements.

What was it, the reference to Zyklon B?  Calling him Jewms?  Or was it the use in any manner of the word "jew."  I've ofted noted that even using jew instead of "jewish" starts to provoke this kind of pavlovian response.  Sorry, but at some point you got mindfucked and have started reacting to things that actually aren't there.  It's important to be dispassionate.

BobPaulson's picture

Actually yes, calling him Jewms is the first one. The second one is your use of the term "and his cousins". If you can't see this as racist then I doubt there is much point in arguing with you.

trav7777's picture


I hope people like MsCreant are reading this exchange as a case in point.

You initially claimed I made "anti-jewish" statements.

Then, when asked to SPECIFICALLY point out the antijewish statements, you could not and fell back to a classic CLOTURE tactic of generic accusation of racism.

I called him "jewms" and called the banksters his "cousins."  Kunstler is a jew.  Calling him jewms was merely pointing out his ethnicity.  As a relatively small and ethnocentric group, the banksters really ARE his cousins.

NEITHER of these statements was anti-jewish.  Yet even when confronted with these PLAIN FACTS, you cannot RESIST throwing out the "well if you don't think this is racist, then I won't talk to you."

Buddy, you got mindfucked somewhere along the way and you aren't thinking straight.  You had a pavlovian reaction to my original post, responded with a conditioned response, and when I specifically asked you to review your evidence for corroboration, you encountered cognitive dissonance.  This is a sign that you are having trouble reconciling your emotions with your logic.

Alienated Serf's picture

Good point bro!  I often throw Mick and Drunk into my supervisor's name, you know, just to point out he is Irish.  No idea why he got pissed and called HR on me.


BobPaulson's picture

Exactly. He must be "mindfucked".

trav7777's picture

yeah...except for the fact that I didn't use a single ethnic slur or make a single derogatory reference to the jew class of persons.

Not one.

Which is why I have REPEATEDLY asked anyone who takes issue to SPECIFICALLY point out the anti-jewish statements in my post.

Normally, I would laugh out loud and tell you drooling dogs to simply STFU, but I respect MsCreant and am proving a point.

You are salivating to a fucking BELL.  The evidence is right there in front of you, EXAMINE IT.  Face the truth.

trav7777's picture

LOL.  You know one of my very good oldest friends is a Jap and we make fun of each other all the time.  I make atomic bomb jokes and he says white people are more like apes.

I think diversity is a thing that should be made fun of...class characteristics say nothing about individuals and vice versa.

What is most troubling is this indian friend of mine at work often makes off color racial statements in the elevator and people laugh.  Soon as I follow up, as a white man, you can basically FEEL the discomfort in the elevator.

I could see had I called him "Jewms Kikestler" or something that somebody might have a point, but I haven't used any ethnic slurs yet.  I only use those on good Gran Torino

Alienated Serf's picture

Slightly off color sarcasm doesn't exactly translate well in posts.  Perhaps you are not as bright as we thought if that has not occurred to you. 

Econolingus's picture

"Don't EVER confuse erudition for intelligence."

Nor racist rants with erudition...

DiverCity's picture

And because you say it's raaaaaacist, it must self-evidently be so, right?

trav7777's picture

no, racist is a word people like him use to cloture the statement of facts they wish weren't true.

The label no longer has any meaning.

DiverCity's picture

"The label no longer has any meaning."



Alienated Serf's picture

Please read up on hatred of economic elites in other parts of the world (Chinese in SE Asia, Indians in Africa etc.), they always become the scapegoat.  The Jews do not have special powers that others do not.  Unfortunately you are blinded by hate and can not think rationally on this matter; which is surprising since you generally make sense with your arguments.  You are obviosly susceptible to the divide and conquer strategy.  "Hey look, its these guys fault, look!" While you get robbed blind.

Let the guilty, regardless of ethnicity pay, if it is a lot of Jews, so be it.

Until then, you keep fightin the good fight for southern, protestant white males, who clearly are the real Chosen People.





trav7777's picture

excuse me, are you talking to me??

Because if you were then is this some kind of a joke?

The economic elites are not a scapegoat, they are to blame.

I think I have said, oh...I dunno...a THOUSAND TIMES that the guilty pay regardless of ethnicity and that is EXACTLY what Putin did.

His oligarchs were jailed or fled to Israel.  That's a fact, I mean you can put it in your pipe and smoke it.  If we get a Putin here, the same thing will occur, a lot of fleeing to Israel by former oligarchs. 

The rest of your stupid post is so shoddily worded and dissonant in its kneejerk accusations that it's not worth responding to.

Oh regional Indian's picture

Flat earth!!!!!! Hot earth! Crowded earth!

Hardly. Eh? 

Local, bricks, mortar, neighbour, community....

And micro-corporations....


NOTW777's picture

right, now this is all the fault of Christians

how much more evidence do you need that liberalism is a mental disease

NOTW777's picture

LOL look liberals flock to the junk light like bugs