Internal War Is Now On The Horizon For America

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Brandon Smith via,

If internationalists were to get their way fully with the world and future historians write their analysis from a globalist perspective of the defunct American nation, they will probably say simply that our collapse was brought about by our own incompetence - that we were our own worst enemy. Yes, they would treat America as a cliché. They will of course leave out the destructive influences and engineered disasters of elitists, that would just complicate the narrative.

My hope is that we do not prove these future historians correct, and that they won’t have an opportunity to exist. My work has always been designed to help ensure that resistance thrives, but also that it is pursued in the most intelligent manner possible.

As I write this, China’s stock market has crashed 7% and was shut down by Chinese authorities who are once again initiating outright intervention to stem the tide. U.S. markets are quickly tracking lower. Oil is plummeting.

Relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran have turned ugly, with Iranian protesters overtaking the Saudi embassy and both sides vowing vengeance. Many Americans won’t care much about this because they think it has nothing to do with them. They don’t realize that Saudi Arabia has already publicly suggested a depeg from the U.S. dollar, effectively ending the decades-long relationship between the greenback and oil. The Iranian event and U.S. ties to both nations only make the fall of the dollar’s petro-status more likely in the near term.  With the U.S. in the middle, "taking a side" will be a demand.  I believe the U.S. government will NOT take a side, and this will elicit a furious response from Saudi Arabia (a currency depeg).

The Obama Administration has just made introductory announcements on new gun control measures through executive order.  These announcements were rather light on details and heavy on crocodile tears.  Their vagueness is clearly deliberate.  Psychological evaluations, redefining who is a lawful firearms dealer, "expanding" background checks; all of these measures could be interpreted broadly to mean almost anything.  We will probably know more in the coming weeks.

And in Oregon over the weekend, Ammon Bundy and friends lured hundreds of protesters under false pretenses using the Hammond family tragedy as a vehicle to then initiate a takeover of federal buildings that have no strategic or symbolic value, boxing themselves into a static position and proclaiming themselves to be the “tip of the spear” in the fight against corrupt government. In the meantime, anyone who questions the validity of this idea or the logic behind the “plan” is immediately labeled a coward and “keyboard warrior” by their supporters.  Emotionally manipulative arguments abound because there are no tactically rational arguments to be made, which tells me that the plan was doomed before it was implemented.

As I wrote in my article “Oregon standoff a terrible plan that we might be stuck with,” some people (not many but some) in the liberty movement are desperately clamoring for a fight; and they don’t care if the circumstances are intelligently executed or idiotically executed. They only care if it kicks off.

I openly supported and aided the efforts at Bundy Ranch because the ranchers were defending their home from clear federal aggression. The Feds were direct invaders in that scenario. In Oregon, protesters are being perceived as the invaders, not the defenders — and all launched in the name of the Hammond family, who asked them NOT to artificially create a standoff. The two scenarios are polar opposites, and Oregon will end in a very different fashion.

I would just like to note that the Founding Fathers were smart enough to avoid deliberately trapping themselves in static positions on land that had no strategic or symbolic importance while inviting the British to "come and get them".  Again, there are right ways and wrong ways to fight tyranny.  Simply being willing to fight is not enough.

Now, if Americans are going to create standoff situations that could result in civil war they should do it over draconian gun control measures such as the use of classified government watch lists as grounds for denial of 2nd Amendment rights, rather than using a family who did not want armed support to begin with as a means to an end.

Keep in mind that watch lists are entirely arbitrary. There is no due process involved whatsoever, meaning you or I could walk into a gun store one day only to have our 4473 form denied because some bureaucrat in an office in D.C. decided we said something he doesn’t like and belong on a naughty list.  The changing of gun dealer laws could be used to erase gun shows and private sales of firearms as well.

A standoff scenario based on these issues would be a much more practical concept than what is taking place in Oregon.

As our situation in this country becomes more precarious, there are going to be far more flashpoints than anyone will be able to keep track of. It is inevitable that a fight between corrupt elements of the U.S. government and regular people will erupt. I and other analysts have been warning people about this for years. I have been educating people on their preparedness options and tactical resources. I have been promoting community preparedness teams in my work with Oath Keepers and helping to organize such teams in my own part of the country. I even designed the first working thermal evasion suit available to civilians to give people half a chance against advanced weaponry.  I have no illusions that a peaceful solution exists.  I know that there is no such solution at this point in the game.  But when the fighting starts, I also know that those who navigate the storm intelligently rather than allowing their emotions to get the best of them are more likely to survive and succeed.

I cannot say how quickly a crisis will develop. But, I can outline some of the many pitfalls you are going to come across as this storm rises.

False Leadership And Irrational Leadership

You are going to stumble across numerous gung ho activists and even politicians who will claim they have the one and only solution, that they are the real “tip of the spear.” First, if you feel compelled to seek out leaders on the mere basis that they have offered to lead you, then you need to do some soul searching. Become your own leader first. And then, if you meet someone with an excellent plan and a principled motive, give him the time of day, but don’t jump blindly into any situation.

If his plan seems poorly thought out, don’t follow him. If his agenda revolves around his own ego and a desire for personal glory, don’t follow him. If he focuses completely on the Obama administration and ignores the complicity of Republican leadership, don’t follow him. If all he talks about are the evils of the federal government but he ignores the puppet strings that lead to international banks and globalist organizations, don’t follow him. If he refuses to allow his initiatives to be questioned or discussed in a reasonable way, do not follow him. If he acts as if his ideas are sacrosanct and questions your “patriotism” when you do not immediately jump on the bandwagon, do not follow him.  Remember, it is the job of this leadership to CONVINCE YOU of the legitimacy of their plan if they are seeking your support.  The burden of evidence is on them.  It is not your job to support them blindly just because you want to avoid being called a "sunshine patriot".

To summarize, if you are going to follow someone, know him well first, and make sure his planning is solid.

Hotheads And Imbeciles

I’ve found that there are two very frustrating extremes within the liberty movement: the people who embrace pacifism and who refuse to even consider the possibility of a violent conflict and self-defense, and the people who have delusions of being the next George Washington and are ready to dive headlong into any violent confrontation without thinking because they want to cement their own legacy. Neither of these groups seems to be able to treat each event as unique: some events requiring a diplomatic approach and some of them requiring the violence of action.

The pacifists are annoying, but they mostly hurt themselves in their lack of preparedness and a warrior’s mindset. The hotheads are the real problem. If you are only looking for a fight, then one will certainly find you; but any moron can trigger a standoff with the Feds. The point is to be able to make a move that matters in the long run. Hotheads cannot think beyond themselves and their immediate needs. They are like mosquitoes mindlessly hunting for blood. Strategic planning is impossible for them and they will destroy allies in the process of their pursuits.

I hate to say it, but there is a distinct possibility that our current generation of freedom advocates and freedom fighters may not live to see the future we are working toward. That better world built on liberty, individualism and voluntary community is something our children will thrive in, not us. If you are not fighting with a long term strategy in mind, then you have missed the entire point.

Factions And Tribes

Humans in crisis events tend to become more tribal in their associations in order to survive, and this is not necessarily a bad thing. I would rather live in a tribal world than under centralized corrupt government or global government any day. That said, if a “tribe” or faction does not respect the rights of the individual or uses unprovoked violence to achieve its goals, then it is no better than any other tyranny. Never trade safety for tyranny, regardless of the difficulties ahead.

The upside is tyrants of small tribes are easier to deal with than tyrants of large nations. They are no more bulletproof than anyone else, and they don’t have the resources to prevent reprisal if they hurt the wrong people.

Expect that families, neighborhoods, towns, churches, gangs and activist groups will rally around each other as a way to provide security. If you do not already have friends and family on board with your way of thinking, you will be isolated, making survival far more difficult if a breakdown does occur.

Governments Will Not Disappear

I can think of very few scenarios in history in which a crisis or collapse immediately facilitated the fall of the government in power. Rather, the government usually morphs into something else, something more dangerous. In fact, crisis is often the prime excuse used by corrupt officials to rationalize greater controls on the population. This in turn acts as a catalyst for more rebellion, which in turn acts as a vindication of the government’s tyranny.

Does this mean people should not rebel against tyranny? No, it means that we have to fight smart and retain the moral high ground at all times. We must act in a way that exposes the true nature of corrupt government, rather than giving them more ammunition to shoot us down with in the public eye. Above all, if we fight we must fight TO WIN.  This means not deliberately searching for an Alamo.  Martyrs are ultimately useless in this kind of war because if we lose, no one will remember them anyway. Glory seekers and self-proclaimed prophets will only lead people to disaster.

Develop a tactical mindset because the future will require tactical minds. Maintain your principles no matter the threats ahead. Retain your humanity. But also, when the fight begins, fight with the intention of victory. Choose your ground wisely.

Comment viewing options

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

Support for bundy bunch is pretty broad

A much better report than ZH previous Reuters hearsay piece.


reports say Twitter suspended ammon bundys account.

Government needs you to pay taxes's picture

That was quick.  I've have thought they'd wait to show what side they were on until there was something significant at stake.

NoDebt's picture

This is why Elysium was created.

There is no need (nor practical application) for an orbiting space station to separate the classes.  It can be done quite easily right here on Earth.  Sub-societies within societies are the wave of the future.  

I no longer wish to associate with those of a radically different social order from myself.  Nor with people who share radically different beliefs.  Over the last year or so I have started to look around to see if there are ways I can live within a society populated with similarly-oriented people to myself.

You can throw whatever hateful words at me you like but you should realize that what I thought was going to be a fruitless endeavor STUNNED me with a deluge of people thinking along similar lines.  And, no, I'm not talking about living in the woods with a bunch if preppers.  It's much more cosmopolitan than that.  That's about as far as I've gotten so far, but it's enough to know I'm FAR from alone in this line of thinking.

Barnaby's picture

That's simple tribalism. Kind of a relic. Evolved humans have learned how to overcome animal instinct. Eventually, tribalism will sink into humanity's history, much like rape and infanticide.

NoDebt's picture

Believe that at your own peril.  Technology changes, economic systems change, political system change.  Human nature does not.


Barnaby's picture

Rape may indeed be a biological imperative, but it's not really conducive to a productive society. Likewise, tribalism is flawed because in a homogenous society, there is no obvious strata, which then leads to dangerous class-based systems.

cornflakesdisease's picture

Yes, things have worked out just as the scientists and enlightened ones have predicted, there for the future will be the same.

manofthenorth's picture

"Eventually, tribalism will sink into humanity's history, much like rape and infanticide."

Just like we will evolve past WAR ??


KesselRunin12Parsecs's picture

I just think it's kind of funny how he uses the word "tribe"

ufos8mycow's picture

"The Almighty tells me he can get me out of this mess, but he's pretty sure you're fu@&ed."

DownWithYogaPants's picture

So Barnaby:  You have magically over come millions / billions of years of evolution by magically snapping your fingers?!

99.9999% of all behavior is evolutionary in its origins.   Try thinking of a dog.  How much does the dog really change his behavior?  A vicious one is always untrustworthy.  A sweet one always a dear.

Same thing with humans.

..........or are you a creationist?  If you are I can forgive you for believing humans can change their fundamental root behavoir.  But I'll never agree with you. 


To make my point more succintly:  You used the concept of "overcoming evolution".....My point would be is that if you can overcome something IT AIN'T EVOLUTION! 

You need a good quiet slow reading of Desmond Morris' book "The Naked Ape".  This book walks you through the physiological basis of our human behavior as simians with little body hair.  It is quite a fascinating read and I recommend it to all but especially the liberals in the bunch here as they need the dose of reality the most.     The book is absolutely larded with useful behavoiral explanation.  For the young hetero guys in the crowd it will get you laid more with careful reading and application.

You can get a free PDF copy here:

Escrava Isaura's picture



if you can overcome something IT AIN'T EVOLUTION!


And if I may add something:

Our time-bomb is mysticism. Its delivery system is language. And its hiding place? The unfathomable coils of our DNA.” -- Reg Morrison


And thanks for the free book. We can search key-words in PDF.


NidStyles's picture

Brought to you courtesy of "The Tribe Inc.".

Stainless Steel Rat's picture

Identification against non-self is the predominant feature of human psychology.  Survival requires we champion our own causes.  This manifests at many levels.

N2OJoe's picture

How does one obtain a homogenous society when multiculturalism and unchecked illegal immigration are both celebrated and run rampant, with the intention of purposely unravelling any unity formed in the past or future?

Your ideas about the future are moot if the same type of people you worship and toil for remain in power, because the society they have created is the exact opposite of the drivel you just spouted off about.

NidStyles's picture

Easy you create it with people of like mindedness. 


That requires hard work, sacrifice and not being a bitch complaining about the situation first though. So you obviously do not fit any of those requirements. 

DaddyO's picture

Barnaby said: Likewise, tribalism is flawed because in a homogenous society, there is no obvious strata, which then leads to dangerous class-based systems.

The key words here are "homogenous society". I hate to break it to you but there is no homogenous society. It has been engineered over the last several years to be as stratified as I've seen in my lifetime. We are in a centrifuge! Spinning rapidly!

Ferguson, Baltimore, the haves vs. havenots, and on and on it goes. The media has purposefully put an exclamation point on the stratification at every point.

Brandon's article highlights the reactions of the Bundy ranch vs. the Hammonds imprisonment to drive home how divided we have become. Even here on the hedge, these differences are shining as bright as day. Just read the comments on any article that dares to challenge the narrative and you will see fight club in all its splendor. Now imagine this being played out in your front yard.

So, just look ahead a bit and see what happens. Imagine a wall being built and the builder's don't have a string line set up to keep them from building things out of square. You don't notice the crooked wall until you get away from the starting point. The further you get from the point of beginning the more glaring the defect becomes.

We are a long way from what was envisioned by the FF and we who have woken up are horrified by how crooked the wall has become.

Now we are looking for ways to correct the wall only to discover that it is so out of square that it cannot be fixed by any means other than to tear it down and rebuild it. The only question unanswered is who will begin the destruction and rebuilding.


TruthHunter's picture

"homogenous society."


A closet communists has outed himself HERE, of all places.

Barnaby, welcome to our(there, I lied. I am a visitor.) tribe

NidStyles's picture

A homogenous society is anti-Communist you idiot. 

Rabbi Chaim Cohen's picture

Uh, no it isn't.

Textbook Communism seeks to destroy all class, cultural and social divisions in order to create "the citizen", something of a drone that works hard for very little return and mindlessly places his/herself beneath the good of the society at large in all his/her decisions. This is why it can never work, mankind's motivations in his unadulterated state hasn't changed since the dawn of civilization. Some will voluntarily submit and be the Citizen, but most will not. Therefore, a critical ingredient in successful Communism is unattainable unless we somehow artificially altered the mind of Mankind himself en masse.

JRobby's picture

"I never liked him. He wasn't "right" in the head"

luckylongshot's picture

What is hidden in this story is that it is possible to look at human history as a cycle where power gets centralised, which leads to corruption, then to tyranny then to war and the cycle then restarts. The simple truth here is that to avoid the mistakes of the past we need to learn the lessons of power. These are that using "power over" in any situation causes conflict, that treating people with respect and decentralising power leads to success and happiness and that those with narcissistic tendencies need to be identified and kept away from positions of power.

In this context talking about tribalism is a distraction, the issue is not which ism is best-we have tried them all- the issue is how exactly our leaders apply the power they enjoy. In America today the cycle has led to tyranny and as this gets thrown out there is a hope that something better replaces it but that hope depends on making sure that power is decentralised. This means the banksters with their control over the right to issue money, must have their power taken from them and the way to do this is through a debt jubilee followed by nationalising the banks as they subsequently fail. This will leaad to most of the corrupt politicians leaving and this will open the door to hope.

Socratic Dog's picture

Someone told me once that a debt jubilee every 7 years is the traditional way of the zio-tribe.  Never understood that (true or not), but I do now.  Without debt forgiveness, a system in which "money" is created by new debt being issued must inevitably lead to what we now have, a smaller and smaller elite owning more and more until the burden of inequality becomes so great that the ponzi can no longer be sustained and everything goes up in flames.

Regular jubilees would be more acceptable because the level of (perceived) loss would be lower for the elites.  A jubilee now would entail the elite giving up ownership and power over damn near everything.  So I don't see it happening.  If it doesn't happen, we crash.  When?  I dunno.  But the longer things somehow hold together, the uglier the crash will be.

Of course, if said elite WANTS to crash the system, after first acquiring ownership over everything that matters to them, then what we have now would be a just about perfect way to do it.  The subsequent power vacuum will allow any organized group to step in and take over everything that remains.  That is the plan of the zios, so far as I can see.  World rule.

And I do think that's where we are.  Well, the founders of the Republic were very clear that it would not be maintained without blood, sweat and tears.  We chose the easy way, so we lose.  Too bad for our kids.  They'll be the ones shedding their blood.

espirit's picture

Obviously the elite believe there is moar wool to shear with increasing population, or they enjoy life on a hot rock 'just a little too much' and shun the darkness where the other bottom feeders lay.

That being said, EMP preps are a last resort. 

Herd Redirection Committee's picture

"First you win, THEN you fight."

Sun Tzu, The Art of War

crossroaddemon's picture

I have a bachelor's degree in anthropology and I have to inform you that you don't know shit about tribalism. Actually I think you're making a common error of mistaking primitive examples of civilization for tribes. Class based systems? Tribes are the closest you get to a classless society. It's tough to have social classes without material wealth.

Barnaby's picture

Respectfully, how primitive is primitive?

crossroaddemon's picture

By definition the moment you start to develop any significant division of labor you are no longer a tribe. And that happens pretty much the moment you cross over to full time agriculture. 

Barnaby's picture

I see. So the colloquial tribe of Israel isn't really a tribe.

Where might the potlatch fit into your rather narrow definitions? Doesn't it defy all of the constructs you seem to lay out?

What would you call the people who populated Colorado's Grand Valley 13,000 years ago? Clear division of labor, itinerant and agricultural, but clearly doomed by a lack of genetic diversity?

janus's picture


i cannot fault your using the term 'tribalism' in reference to NoDebt's vision.  for the record, and before continuing, i happen to think NoDebt's notion -- though loosely defined -- on society's projected evolution to be both inevitable and preferable.

returning again to this outmoded term 'tribalism', i think a better word would perhaps be 'ideolism'.  as Christ said, you cannot put new wine in old wineskins.

sure, these clusters of various 'ideolisms' would -- for the most part -- share certain physical traits; and that's due only to the fact that the future constituents of these ideolistic tribes would be sired of cultures sharing mores, sensibilities and modes of living sufficiently similar in character and disposition.  that is to say, i would most likely gravitate to one that is predominately white and middle class.  people who believed in the value of work; people who wouldn't think of taking another's possessions; people among whom i'd never think of locking doors; people who believe in 'live & let live'; people who're inclined to the life of the mind (bookish folks who enjoy a pint and stimulating conversation)...i could go on.

that is not to say that these ideolisms would be purely homogeneous in terms of their ethnic composition.  even so, to suggest that a society or culture (no matter how big or small) is necessarily doomed for lack of an active program to graft in as much genetic 'diversity' as is possible is flatly ridiculous.

think of our 'melting pot' for just one moment.  it is one thing to make a palatable stew that is nutritious and yummy.  in the making, a chef is careful and selective...discriminating even...when selecting what ingredients will compose his creation.  that's what Michelin rated chefs will do.

whence our 'chefs' (no longer Michelin rated, but now mess-hall untermench that don't know cumin from cayenne) got to thinkin that the 'melting pot' was a kettle of chaos, the stew lost all definition and was no longer a stew -- now just a cesspool of human detritus.

fuck whoever said "give us your tired...blah, blah blah".  that shit ain't in the constitution; and i've never consented to it as a defining tenant of our national ethos.

give us your best, and keep the rest.

anyway, this belies amorica's fatal flaw, and it is one of philosophy.  we've tried to be everything; and much like an amoeba in a hypotonic solution, we are going to explode into nothingness.  for it stands as an axiom: that which seeks to be everything necessarily becomes nothing.


NidStyles's picture

I beg to differ, because I have a piece of paper that makes me an "expert" and you can ignore all of the other people whom have had similar piece of paper that define them as "experts", because I am present and telling you that you can.


Fuck your degree, that even if you had; it is meaningless.


Tribalism doesn't disappear because you have more people or a division of labor. It's ingrained in our minds genetically. It's a part of our identities, not an expression of society. It's why we have in-group and out-group behavior. 

Ghordius's picture

+1 to "fuck your degree" NidStyles

two things, though. first, not everybody is born in the same way to search for "his tribe". there is xenophobia and xenophily, i.e. "search for similar" and "search for others".

second, culture, as in common culture, functions similarly as a focus for that inborn instinct. this is particularly visible where language matters more then race, for example. I do understand that many will balk at such a thought, but there it is

DaddyO's picture

Just remember, education is not indicative of intelligence!

Our current system has churned out a bunch of over-educated imbeciles!

They cannot think much beyond the end of their noses...


Ghordius's picture

+1, absolutely agree on that. any education that produces "experts" in one field only produces something like "idiot savants"

NidStyles's picture

Education is indoctrination into believing what the societal engineers want us to believe. It's just more blank slate theory nonsense. The low IQ "educated" ones think they can create new people through indoctrination, but it just destroys them mentally and culturally. Unless that is their goal, which in that case; it's working great. 



Ghord- so my reply doesn't get lost. Those societies based solely around common languages rather than genetic and tribal identity never last, they have throughout history always failed because the genetically ingrained biases still exist. You would go to a German and start demanding that he gives up his milk, cheese and steaks because you think culturally it's disgusting. He will laugh in your face and continue along being German with wanting milk, cheese, and steaks. You can repress that natural genetic instinct, but he's going to end up right back in that situation of craving that cheese and steak again, because is what his ancestors evolved into in order to survive the environment they came from. You can't change that, no matter how hard you try. To change it, is to destroy it. Trying to change Germanic people is to genocide them, because they are what they are because of evolution. It's the same with the Jews as well.  


You can not break genetic programming, the blank slate theory is horribly flawed and it's been falsified for over a century. If I don't get my cheese and milk, I am very cranky person. When I have both I am regular and calm. Don't even try to touch my steaks, I will eat you instead. (joking obviously for you retards out there)


You can remove the stinger from a scorpion, and it will continue to keep trying to sting you even days later right before it starves to death because you removed it's digestive ability.  





Ghordius's picture

completely agree. I feel myself the millennia of milk-product addiction in my very bones, and my cravings for cheeses are a response to that

but humans are highly adaptable. in an environment where some people are more genetically similar to you but other people are culturally more similar to you...

... strange things happen. though only strange if not experienced. The Truly Rich And Powerful are a splendid example for that, leading to the phenomenon called "communism of the rich"

yes, we tend, some more, some less, to discriminate positively versus those that are "like us". but we also want to be understood, and liked for how we think and act

how about the brotherhood of... military veterans? those who understand what you went through? never experienced that?

NidStyles's picture

Not all Vets have the same experience, but it's similar. My brotherhood of Vets is not the same as every other Vets, as you know the Infantry is a really small community, and Infantry in Recon units is even smaller. We can co-related with the guys in line units, but our experiences are vastly different. 

Without taking the douche route of explaining it, not really. I can't relate to guys that were in Iraq. Their experiences were so vastly different than mine. Many of the Infantry dudes that were in Iraq are so skittish that getting close enough to talk to them on personal level is almost impossible. I simply can not related to what they went through. 

Socratic Dog's picture

Over-educated imbeciles....  Nah, just not smart enough to see beyond the indoctrination.  The "I have a degree, so there" expert here was able to regurgitate what he heard in a lecture one day, and be convinced that it is the absolute truth, and that is exactly what his education was meant to do.  Nidstyles goes way beyond that, gets into some subtleties and nuances and even <<gasp>> some abstract thinking.  His education didn't take, or maybe he never had one.  That would make him an autodidact, which all of us here who learn from these articles and the (usually far more enlightening) comment streams are.  Indoctrinated learners feel very threatened by autodidacts, understandably.

Over the years I have heard some truly astonishing bullshit come out of the mouths of degreed sheep  regurgitating what they learned at school.  But they're the ones who get on in this world.  Well, maybe not for long, I would hazard a guess.

Chris Dakota's picture

Andrew Breitbart "I came out of college with fewer skills then I had going in. I am very angry at my profeesors for brainwashing me"

The highly educated are the enemies of this republic. Look where the highly educated have taken us, destruction.

Yes fuck all those student loan or government sponosred degrees.

MeBizarro's picture

The only way you leave college with fewer skills than you arrived is that you took a largely meaningless major (American Studies), didn't apply yourself at all or become involved in things, and essentially partied/drank/chased pussy. 

Breitbart always said that same empty refrain projecting is issues outward and never taking any personal responsibility.  Same thing with his shitty form of hack and sensationalist journalism.  Never acknowledged when he published something in error or said something outlandish that prove to be 100% incorrect.  Self-aggrandizing dickhead

Chris Dakota's picture

You didn't address the brainwashing he was talking about.

Look at those Ivy League kids...brainwashed much?

Google learned it's lesson, they look at people from State Colleges now.

Because the brainwashed kids are worthless and have no real skills.

Government needs you to pay taxes's picture

The programming was heavy handed and blatent @ my undergrad institution.  My high school was kickass @ academics.  For sure, it was stronger as a learning center than college.  Oxford was my answer, tho.  Unfettered, unstructured learning envi.  The best, and it wasnt even close.  It should be about an individual, a good library, and an occasional guide with a tutor.  If US public schooling ever understood this, property taxes in most areas could decrease >30%.  The 'good library' is underappreciated, b/c it innoculates a student against the orthodoxy of the current age.  Gotta get different views from different authors from different time periods.

MeBizarro's picture

What exactly is this 'brainwashing' that supposedly occurs at Ivy League?  I have friends who are both conservative and liberal fiscally who are Ivy League grads. 

Also have several friends who work for Google and I have no idea what you are talking.  Getting hired at Google is still highly competitive and most (not all) state college BAs have no shot at getting in the door unless they have some really unique experience and/or abiltiy. 

crossroaddemon's picture

First off, we really have no idea what really happened to those people. But yes... Israel is not, by any strict definition, a tribe. Social scientists draw a distinction between a tribe and a civilization. There were a lot of civilizational attempts here in the new world; the people you mentioned are indeed an example. 

LawsofPhysics's picture

"What would you call the people who populated Colorado's Grand Valley 13,000 years ago? " --

DEAD. The only reason an asshat like yourself has time for such mental masterbation is because of the excess production of others. Go fuck yourself you selfish fuck.

espirit's picture

+I Concur.

Sunk Costs Effects.

Most civilizations end there.


Ghordius's picture

"By definition the moment you start to develop any significant division of labor you are no longer a tribe. And that happens pretty much the moment you cross over to full time agriculture"

I beg to differ. Strongly. Yes, lots of cases in history where tribal cohesion was destroyed that way, but also lots of cases where it did not happen, or external forces did. And plenty of cases of tribal cohesion working very well, but with governments working hard at keeping it down. Many people in Iraq, Syria and other places in the ME still have a strong tribal system, for example. And we have many such examples in Europe, as well as in Asia

El Vaquero's picture

I'm pretty sure anthropologists trained in New Mexico would disagree.  We have the pueblos.  That was agriculture plus tribalism.  It still is, in many respects.  There were divisions of labor even in hunter-gatherer societies. 


It's either that, or anthro needs to unfuck itself. 

bluez's picture

Probably most countries could be called multi-cultural. Ideally, the various religious or ethnic groups should retain most of their cultural heritage, while also making significant efforts to adapt to the fundamental cultural foundations of the land in which they reside. They should try to obey the laws and learn the official language, to whatever extent they can. Not everybody can be expected to be able learn new languages, however.

In the U.S., I thing the Chinese people have done a very good job of achieving this balance. Other minorities have been far less successful, unfortunately.