Yesterday (March 25, 2020), Vladimir Putin held a televised speech addressed to the citizens of the Russian Federation, occasioned by the emergence of the coronavirus worldwide epidemic. He talked about the unfolding events that have hit Europe and the United States and announced a number of measures that the government was engaged in, combating the biological threat. During the whole coming week all professional activities are to be suspended while citizens will be secured with money from the state and a number of tax exemptions. A speech like any other that might be held by any leader of any state under the circumstances. There was, however, something that distinguished this address from similar speeches.

+

Towards the end of his appearance President Putin announced an important fiscal initiative: recipients of dividends earned in Russia will have to pay a 15% tax (rather than the 2% as binding at present) if they intend to transfer the money abroad. Consider that the income tax in Russia amounts to 13%. With this measure President Putin is doing away with yet another yoke that was put on Russia during the Yeltsin era. With this proposal of a legislative bill President Putin will put a stop to capital flight. Surely, the moment for such an announcement was carefully selected: who during the time of the worldwide pandemic, as the current events are referred to, will dare to oppose the move?

President Putin also announced that Russia would renegotiate with other countries agreements on double taxation and in case those other countries did not yield to Moscow’s demands, Russia will unilaterally renege on those agreements.

Consider also that President Putin can kill two birds with one stone. Capital will be kept within the country and the same measure will affect the oligarchs and their Western partners. There will be less money to line the pockets of foreign investors, less credited to foreign bank accounts, less money for subversive political activities in Russia and – what follows naturally – a resultant more intense – let us express it in mild terms – dislike for the Kremlin “regime”, voiced in unison at home and abroad. Also, since almost every action is like a double-edged sword, there might be smaller foreign investment in Russia.

As things accompanying the epidemic are developing, we can note a few interesting phenomena:

[1] borders are useful after all whereas the mass movement of people may be deleterious;

[2] virtue signalling has long gone beyond being ridiculous;

[3] the international solidarity is wishful thinking;

[4] Beijing and Moscow are far closer to Italy – a European Union member-state in need – than Brussels, Paris, Berlin or for that matter Washington.

[1] Borders are useful. Up to now the principle of the free movement of people (to be precise: labour and customers) has been enshrined in all Western states and regarded as unassailable. Whoever had second thoughts about it was ridiculed mercilessly and touted as inhumane, backward and what not. Nowadays all European governments have decided to isolate their countries from the outside world, including their EU member-state neighbours, and they did not need approval from Brussels. Fear of the DNA double helix soaring here and there made conceited politicians and self-assured citizens bow their knees to reality. They have all at the long last recognized that reality is something that refuses to satisfy our wishes.

[2] The other value enshrined in the Western world was its ethics of being race blind. Lo and behold fear of death has shown that people are race conscious, xenophobic and tend to cherish in-group loyalty rather than the global fraternity of all human beings. In Italy and the United States people naturally have begun to behave in a way suggestive of their conscious avoidance of the Chinese co-citizens or visitors. A quite natural behaviour when you consider that the epidemic started in and spread from China. This, however, was like the gauntlet thrown down to the politicians and social activists who have made a point of virtue signalling. Coronavirus prompts ‘hysterical, shameful’ Sinophobia in Italy (Al Jazeera); As the coronavirus spreads across the globe, so too does racism (The Atlantic); Coronavirus: Spike in reports of ‘racist’ abuse of Chinese people in Italy (The Local). These are but a few titles. For them it is not the epidemic that poses a problem, it is racisms that is rearing its ugly head. Only when it comes to acid tests can we see reality – something that refuses to bow to our wishes – of inter-human relations. People are in-group oriented (why shouldn’t they be, after all?) and xenophobic. They are hard-wired for that. Naturally, they are concerned first and foremost about their families and then about their extended families (even though they may not admit it consciously or in an attempt to avoid official ostracism) and not about the whole world, about nations in neighbouring countries, let alone about communities located in the other parts of the globe. This provides fertile ground for the few who want to tout themselves as friends of humanity and feel they are operating on moral high ground, which is a shot of dopamine as good as any other: Italian Mayor Urges Citizens to ‘Hug a Chinese’ to Fight Racism; Italian virologist says political correctness doomed his country’s coronavirus response; and On February 1st Florence, Italy, Celebrated “Hug a Chinese” Day.

You still don’t know why the death toll in Italy has surpassed that in Wuhan?

Continue reading →

By guest author C. van Rijn MD

We are at a crucial point in history. Climate change is seen as the biggest threat humanity has ever known. The feeling of pending disaster, guilt about the climate and a need to do penance seems to be growing in all wealthy Christian countries, but is totally absent from others. The origin of the threat is global warming which is, according to the prevailing opinion, caused by the greenhouse gases. To prevent this alleged catastrophe, we have the intention of investing an enormous amount of money to reduce the use of fossil fuels. This investment will lead to a huge economic downturn, exacerbated by the loss of economic competitiveness with other countries which will not be burdened with this scheme. This will inevitably lead to the deterioration of the prosperity of the Western countries in all areas. So before these extreme expenses are made, it may be wise to look carefully at the scientific basis underlying the global warming phenomenon.

In this article we first consider all the misconceptions and deceit rampant in public debate on this the topic of the green house effect. We arrive at the conclusion that if you omit all lies and exaggerations, the scientific basis appears to be paper-thin. Second, we hope to point out why the European version of the green new deal will be a tragedy.

The past 600,000 years
The empirical evidence for the greenhouse effect over this period has consisted mainly of a chart that suggests a causal link between CO2 and temperature levels.

The fact that CO2 increases have always occurred a few hundred years after temperature rises means that the causality is reversed: a temperature rise causes a CO2-increase. Al Gore who used this graph in the movie “an inconvenient truth” was rightly condemned in an English court for misinterpreting this graph.

The past 1000 years
The warming in this period is notorious because of the iconic hockey stick graph fabricated by hide-the-decline Michael Mann and prominently shown in the 2001 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report.

Rife with warped data, mixing data from tree-rings and thermometers, hiding the medieval warming and using poor statistics, it turned out the be a plain fraud. The author filed lawsuits against the accusations, but lost them all to his denouncers.(Mann vs. Ball, Mann vs Steyn).

Continue reading →

The European elites pay homage to their new idol: “the refugee”, the immigrant. At the same time their fellow citizens are of little interest to them. They prefer to invest in the electorate of the future: in the arrivals from Africa and Asia, who are slowly but surely replacing the indigenous European population.

Germany
The discrimination against German citizens is embodied in the new Integration Act, which gives “refugees” substantial advantages that the German government does not guarantee the German people. One example is enough: the refugees who enrich German society in this way are given free courses where, in addition to the German language, a daily four-hour programme is also offered, during which they can learn the basics of some trades. Such a programme is not available to the German unemployed.
Continue reading →

A piece of stats news has been broken in Poland that the number of surgeons has dropped by a quarter (one fourth, twenty-five percent) as compared to 2006. Within thirteen years. Make a guess: what happened? How did that large number of doctors disappear? Young people stopped being interested in medical studies? No. Make another guess. The demand for surgery is much smaller since society at large is healthier and healthier courtesy of the salutary regulations and decrees of the European Union? No. Make yet another guess. The surgeons emigrated to Western countries? Spot on! Bingo!

The Western intellectual circles regard it as evil to exploit weaker nations, especially the Third World countries. They love calling such behaviour fascism (a very fashionable offensive appellation) or racism or what not. Occupying moral high ground, they applaud sending doctors to Somalia or Nigeria or Bangladesh. Yet somewhat miraculously this principle does not apply when physicians from Eastern Europe keep coming to the Western states, draining East European health care systems. Why shouldn’t they after all? We need them – say Western intellectuals – our societies are growing older, there must be someone willing to take care of them.

How do the Western intellectuals reconcile their indignation at exploiting poorer (Third World) countries with depriving Eastern Europeans of their doctors? Oh, come on, another lofty principle is made use of: human rights, among which the freedom of movement is especially enshrined. So the story goes that “we do not rob the poorer countries of their doctors (engineers, teachers, professionals of any kind): they merely use their human rights and flock to places where they have better economic conditions.”

Continue reading →

Populations grow despite the best efforts of abortionists. Even a cursory look reveals that abortions routinely only take place in high income countries. Populism occurs where people express its dissenting voice i.e. vox populi and mobilization is where the underclass is organized to dissent (protest) against its elites.

From an elitist point of view the age-old question is always how to manage the underclasses. It can be compared to a CEO managing the company night watchman or an African King his herdsman. In an organized structure these managerial techniques are generally successful because the manager is ahead of the curve, while with respect to populism or mobilization, it is behind the curve.

Generally speaking a company manager is subtly reminded on a daily basis of the performance of low level employees and the same holds good for the African King. When referring to “elites”, it becomes obvious (by their very actions) that they are so far removed from reality that all control is essentially lost. The elitist lifestyle becomes decadent to the extent that they don’t care what their underclasses do and are always surprised by those “deplorable populists” and their mobilization.

The reaction of the elites to these “uprisings” differ with respect to whether it is populist or mobilized. In high-income America they become viciously anti-populists while in communist China they exert MORE control.

Violence against high-income country populists is also visible in Francewhile almost no action is taken in low-income (communist) South Africa against xenophobiawhere the elitesare also attempting to improve measures of control (such as to reduce unproductive protests against municipal service deliveries).

Continue reading →

Despite being a second-class citizen in South Africa,I may still express my opinionin a country that has declared itself a democracy.This article is therefore written in the context of “Fair-Discrimination”meaning that I am not allowed to discriminate against any person of colour, but that any person of colour may discriminate against me for the content of this (white) article (even if it is published in a different country – in which case I should use a pseudonym).

South Africa, a country with roughly the size of Texas and a population of less than 60 million people, has 9 provinces and eleven official languages. There are two main cities, one of which is Cape Town – the seat of parliament, and Pretoria – the seat of the government and home to the diplomatic corps. Besides, Johannesburg is the business and Durban the harbour city. Cape Town is also home to hi-tech because of the juncture of undersea cable connections and a preferred destination for royal elites who are attracted by its mild Mediterranean climate. Unfortunately though, Cape Town is also the world’s murder capital. That this would affect the economy is no surprise.
Continue reading →