While the West is busy hating itself, Russia, China and other former super powers are building civilizational confidence to increase their competition on the world political map. It's no surprise that we at Corrupt have a few less admirable things to say about the West as it is today. But we're also hopeful and positive about society in general. A contradiction? Let me recap why the current Western status quo should be criticized, but still is both dominant and pleasant to live by:

Liberal democracy: Before the New World Order (pre-WWII) Europe was a collection of dictatorships, which later transformed into socialist Fascist States. During that time we saw a lot of tragedy, including economic collapse and genocide. Yeah, democracy sucks, but looking at history, it's no wonder our leaders wanted to abandon the old way of managing government.

Capitalism: Admittedly, capitalism has its problems. Yet we tried out socialism, in different extremes, and we saw that it completely failed wherever it was implemented. What happened when nations around the world, almost exclusively under Anglo-American leadership, began adopting a (mostly) free market principle? They quickly escaped mass poverty and low standard of living. Today not even hardcore-socialist countries like Russia and China really believe in a planned economy.

Multiculturalism: Even the Nazis get this one; we're living in a mass-communication society today. Regardless if you don't believe in bringing in lots of people into your country, your culture cannot avoid being influenced by foreign cultures, rendering cultural patterns dynamic and ever-changing. That diversity of ideas and lifestyles, one way or another, will exist also within pretty homogeneous cultures is a mark of the age.

NWO: Sure, it exists, a New World Order. Why so many people resent it is baffling, because never before has so many people in the world enjoyed such a high standard of living under extremely humane conditions. Maybe that's a problem in itself, but there's a reason to why the West won the Cold War, and why everyone else suspiciously is trying to emulate its development.

Did you think feminism was a united matriarchal front in the West? If so, this may surprise you, and give you a few good laughs on the way. Ladies and gentlemen, this is the Swedish-American cultural divide within the feminist movement. It all starts with Swedish feminists celebrating Elin Nordegren's assault on Tiger Woods:

“Swing it again, Elin!” wrote Jan Helin, editor in chief of Aftonbladet, the country's biggest newspaper, on his personal blog. One of the paper's top reporters, Ann Söderlund, proclaimed, “Thank God for girls like Elin. Next time, I hope she uses a bigger club."

Britta Svensson, a well-known columnist at the tabloid Expressen and a former U.S.-based correspondent, commented, “Our Swedish hearts are overwhelmed with pride, because our very own Elin didn’t take any s—. Just like a tough Swedish girl shouldn't. Elin is our heroine.”

Beat your man down if he's cheating on you--good idea. Of course, feminism using its funny logic, I don't suppose it would be valid for a man to beat down his cheating wife? This is the question a nervous American feminist asks herself:

If Swedish cultural commentators want the world to know that Swedish women stand for divorcing cheaters, I think that’s fine—if a bit odd. If they want the world to know that Swedish women stand for beating the cheaters and then divorcing them, I think that’s a fucked up standard to set for an entire country of girls and boys. Plenty of Swedish girls will grow up to be cheaters, too—do we want their future spouses to grow up thinking it’s empowering to physically assault them for screwing around?

What you gotta be aware of here is that the people cheering Elin's golf swinging aren't all hardcore feminists. No, they're simply ordinary public journalists. Yes, this is the Swedish cultural climate anno 2009. And the American feminists cannot believe what they read. But if Swedish feminists make American women upset, how about when strong, independent women from America--the kind of women Swedish feminists worship, come to visit Sweden? The fun never ends. I present to you Anna Anka:

Anna Anka had an interview published on the Swedish web site newsmill.se where she expressed her wish to be considered a role model for Swedish women and that Swedish men are to equal and should not become diaper- changing house maids they should instead become more like American men, who according to Anna know how to treat a woman but cannot spend more than 20 minutes with their kid without having a panic attack.

Anna Anka’s comments have caused some upset feelings in Sweden, the country of “lagom”, just enough, and “jamstalldhet” equality between the sexes. Obviously it is not politically correct to claim that being a so called house wife can be the goal in life for a Swedish woman. To also claim that such a person would be a role model for Swedish women is of course provocative.

Are American feminists reading this? Yes, it's not a joke. Suggesting that being a housewife is a good thing creates public uproar in Sweden. Not among feminists, but among millions of ordinary Swedish women. Anna Anka became such a huge media figure because of her comments that she ended up at Swedish television during Christmas prime time for several hours. How evil can this woman be? Let's look at what upset so many people, including Swedish feminists:

Anna Anka: “I want to become a role model for Swedish women. In Sweden it is allowed to let oneself degrade, as soon as one has caught a man. I feel sorry for Swedish men. They marry beautiful women that quickly turn unattractive, dress themselves in rags and ignore their husband’s needs.”

I don't know if this is specific for Swedish women, but we all know it's true. Swedish women have been told they're candy forever and only need to look after their own needs. No wonder we cannot sustain happy marriages anymore.

Anna Anka: It was so nice to come to a country [USA]where men know how to treat a woman. Here men take care of the economy, anything else would be an insult to the woman and to the man in the relationship. Overall, American men have so much more style than Swedish men. If you go to a business lunch it never happens that the woman pays, while a Swedish man does not hesitate to insult the woman by allowing her to look for money while he himself is calculating his part of the bill. American men know how to woe a woman. They are very romantic and buy expensive gifts.

Swedish men refrain from paying for dates for two reasons. One, they aren't allowed to, because that would upset their dates, who wouldn't feel "independent" enough. Two, they're afraid their dates will just screw them over on food and drinks. I bet the cultural climate here differs a lot from conservative America.

Anna Anka: Then we have the dads. Swedish dads are pathetic, changing diapers and their equality. A real American man panics if he is alone with his kid for more than 20 minutes. American dads do not cook, they do not iron their clothes, they work and support their families.

I'm not sure American men are that impotent, but what we do know is that Swedish men do everything to try to be equal. And no, it probably doesn't turn women on anyway, so it's just a waste of time.

Anna Anka: American men however, appreciate their wives, they are very romantic. They write little notes, call and leave love messages on the phone. Swedish men never do that.

Leaving notes at phones? Swedish women would call the police. They'd probably file a lawsuit about gender discrimination as well to make some cash.

Anna Anka: and the Swedish people are upset over the fact that I am married to an older man......Remember that people that try to make you look small, are really trying to drag you down to their own level, and that people have the ability to focus on the negative. No one puts up a sign saying Watch out for the nice dog!

She's hilariously clumsy, but she's right: Why are we beating down on her for working out at the gym and trying to look attractive for her husband? Why do women dress out at clubs and parties in the first place? To attract mates. Why would that condition change just because they get in relationships? This is basic evolutionary knowledge, but Sweden missed the train.

Anna Anka: Here [in the USA sic] the mums do not nag on their daughters about education and going to college, instead they encourage them to find an athlete or a celebrity! Isn’t that wonderful?

Well, in a way it is, because right now every Swedish girl growing up is told that she needs to become a college genius. Most of them will spend their time chasing careers, but missing motherhood at the age of 40. By that time they either go to Denmark to buy sperm or cyber date any random man coming along that's up for the task.
Of course, Anka says all of this about Hollywood to piss Swedish women off; what she says is half-dumb, half-true.

Anna Anka: What I would like to say is that in the USA it is all about service. It employs a lot of people who otherwise would have lived in poverty. If the Swedish people had learnt from the USA the Swedes would have time for each other. Now they come home and are in a bad mood and need to clean the house and iron clothes. There is no quality time. Then we have a gigantic problem with the new Internet generation. It is uneducated and cheap, and their lives on blogs and twitter are pointless.

Now you understand why this woman pisses Sweden off. She pushes buttons. No one wants to be told that their life is shit. But if our government-managed jobs really suck, we really don't have that much money after taxes, we really feel our family life is a drag, and if our children are already lost in cyber space and lagging behind in school--why do we try to shoot the messenger?

All of you reading are now sitting on one final question: How could Sweden get this bad? Novaseeker over at the Spearhead answers that question brilliantly:

What “works” in Sweden (even assuming it does so there … chat with some Swedish men about that … I know I have and what I have been told is not very complementary) would not in a million years work in the large, ethnically and culturally diverse Anglosphere countries. But the left, being filled with dreamy idealists, can’t see that reality beyond the end of their own upwardly-turned noses.

Like liberal democracy, socialism and Apple computers, Scandinavian feminism "works." But it won't last. We, aware citizens, are part of a once great civilization. It's sinking. We have to make sure we do not go down with it. Joyfully we anticipate the decline, because we are the few who will rise above.

HT: The Spearhead

Latest news say Obama pulled out on the missile shield project in Poland. Victory or defeat? First, let's look at what Alfred wrote yesterday:

Perhaps it is just a coincidence: now that Russia has come to agree that some form of action against Iran is necessary, the missile shield has been scrapped.

Was the shield merely a pawn, the eventual discard of which was always intended to be offered to the Russians, in exchange for implicit support for America's much more important foreign policy towards the Middle East?

This perspective essentially seems to say Obama did US-Russian relations a favor by scrapping the missile shield, and at the same time gained a friend in the struggle against Iran. This is basically what Joshua Tucker at the Monkey Cage also argues:

So the bottom line is: (1) it is unclear how these interceptors would have improved US national security; (2) it is unclear how the interceptors would have improved the security of US allies in Eastern Europe; (3) they would have been expensive (note Obama’s mention of “cost-effectiveness” in his speech this morning); (4) we don’t know if they would have worked (note Obama’s emphasis on the effectiveness of his proposed alternative, stating in this morning’s statement that “This new approach will provide capabilities sooner, build on proven systems and offer greater defenses against missile threats than the 2007 missile defense program.”); and (5) they would have continued to provide a serious impediment to improving US-Russian relations. All in all, this does not seem like a program worth going forward with simply because people in the previous administration saw fit to initialize it. When you are the president, you ultimately need to take decision that will improve the national security of your nation, and, in my opinion, on balance the proposed missile shield would not have done so.

Tucker adds that we don't seem to know what the shield's really for, and adding its expensive costs plus an angry Russia, Obama did the right thing. That's not what Brett Stevens over at Amerika.org thinks. He provides commentary supporting a standpoint that suggests America needed the shield to fend off a Russian attack:

This missile shield was never about Iran. It was about using the one advantage the USA has over Russia, which is advanced technology, to remove the Russian ability to have a guaranteed first strike nuclear attack on the USA. The missile shield would have kept Russia in check because if Russia did anything untoward, the Americans could counter her militarily without being worried that the conflict would escalate to a nuclear level.

So: (a) America wants to stop Russia from nuclear bombing the White House, (b) Bush wanted to set up a missile shield in Poland to counter such an attack, (c) but now Obama wants to make friends with Russia instead. A win-win situation. Is all of this true? Let's debunk some common myths once and for all, so that all Russophobes and Neocons can share sweet dreams tonight.

Myth 1: Bush wanted the missile shield to protect America from a Russian nuclear attack

This is nonsense for two main reasons:

(1) The missile shield wouldn't be able to defer any Russian nuclear attack:

Let me begin by stating that the author’s suggestion that Russia’s defense against a US first strike would somehow be undermined by the presence of a missile shield in Eastern Europe is patently absurd. Russia’s ability to launch a counterstrike in such an unlikely event cannot be undermined by the existence of an ABM (Anti Ballistic Missile) system in one small country. A US counter-force First strike would definitely incur a counter strike by surviving Russian forces. The small-scale system they are contemplating for the Czechs cannot possibly provide even a low-grade defense for US missiles. The reasons are simple: The US itself currently has no missiles in Eastern Europe, period. And, US intermediate-range missiles have been eliminated from Western Europe as a result of the INF (Intermediate Nuclear Forces) treaty that was signed back in the 80s.

(2) Russian missiles wouldn't even pass through European air space:

And Russian missiles targeting US forces take the shortest possible trajectory, meaning across the Arctic Ocean, Bering Sea, from their own sub-based platforms and bomber forces. Their trajectory does not pass through European air space.

Myth 2: The missile shield would threaten Russian national security

As we've seen, Russian missiles wouldn't be deferred by the shield if it was ever built. On the contrary, Russia's fears have instead come true thanks to its own paranoia:

Nobody on the Russian side could explain how a handful of interceptor rockets in Poland would hamper a nuclear superpower that can launch weapons from anywhere on the planet.

America is now committed to boosting Poland’s defences. The paradox is that Russia complained loudly about something that did not matter, but by doing so it has got America to do something that does: beef up its security relationship with Poland. This will include more training and equipment (including such sought-after kit as armoured Humvees) as well as high-tech air-defence systems for Warsaw. Even if missile defences are delayed, officials say, these promises will be kept.

As I reported earlier this week, no missile shield means the Baltic States, including Poland, most likely will want to increase NATO presence to raise the security against the Russians. So while Russia complained about a non-existent problem, it can now count on more Western intervention in its backyard.

Myth 3: The missile shield was pointless from the beginning

Not at all. Besides intercepting any nuclear strike from Iran, which America stated was its main purpose, the shield would ensure great security for several European countries:

Such an ABM system as that planned for the Czech Republic provides zero force protection to US subs, bombers or ICBMs (Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles). The only possible protection such a system can provide against Russian-launched weapons would be for the Czechs, the Poles and perhaps some of the other European countries, including former members of the Warsaw Pact. If intermediate-range nuclear missiles have largely been scrapped from Europe, then what is so terribly wrong with the Europeans having something, however small, to protect Europe from a nuclear attack? The European Union currently poses no threat to Russia’s defense, period.

And Europe has a right to defend itself also, even if it's not as handsome and intelligent as it used to be, right?

Myth 4: Pulling the missile shield helps American-Russian relations

This is, as you probably could guess, is a lot of fancy Obamarama talk. Russian foreign policy doesn't work that way:

Moscow is unlikely to interpret a repositioning of missile defense the way Obama hopes -- as a trust-building measure to incentivize Russian cooperation on other fronts. Instead, Russian leaders will learn a simple lesson: that when America and its allies are threatened, Washington backs down. Already, Russia has watched as the Obama administration has softened U.S. support for Georgia and backed off the push for Ukrainian membership in NATO. A third retreat in less than a year would likely trigger the typical Russian response to retreat: additional aggression. A Moscow that sees its repeated demands for a sphere of influence met tacitly today will be bolder in pushing for recognition of that sphere explicitly tomorrow.

The more room you give the Russians, the more they take, as we saw during the war in Georgia, where a paralyzed European Union left the Russians free to roam through Georgia,refusing to leave the land.

Knowing Putin has threatened to target Europe with nuclear missiles before, I believe most of us Europeans would sleep better at night knowing that America still is watching our sorry backs, because we're too meek and disorganized to do it ourselves. This despite the fact that any nuclear war, especially between America and Russia, would be a highly unlikely event.

Reality: Pulling the missile shield was one of Obama's biggest mistakes

Obama has now weakened Western and Eastern European security, displayed profound American weakness, and sent entirely the wrong signals to both Russia and Iran. Brett Stevens correctly identifies the fallacy: Obama thinks US passivity will reduce Russia's aggression. That's probably the biggest flaw in the Obama Administration's current foreign policy paradigm--one that has already embarrassed America in Venezuela and Turkey.

People who still worry about Russia's security after reading this should keep the following in mind: military might is useless unless you're willing to use it. America has during its war on terror proven it will defend itself at all costs. Europe has proven it's a disorganized collection of old medieval kingdoms too dysfunctional to stop a war in a country that begs for NATO membership. Europe is indeed powerful, maybe more so than Russia, but it's too meek to use that power. Strong horse, weak horse. What would you choose?

The problem with the kind of inconveniences we face as citizens of industrial nations is that their practicality tend to eschew our core values. We would like to help that poor man being harassed by a gang of youths, but we don't, because we could get hurt. We would like to contribute to the culture of our community, but we don't, because there is no time for it. And so on.

Some people, like this County Sheriff, decided to break the pattern. When facing a soldier's procession while driving her car, a woman felt inconvenienced to the point where she wrote an upset email to the Sheriff:

I tried to call you earlier this morning, but was unable to obtain your extension from the voice mail system as I was not sure of your first name or correct spelling of your last.

I was inadvertently in this procession as I was leaving work on 270 from Creve Coeur and proceeding on Hwy. 30 West. I have some issues and complaints. I called the Sheriff's office last night, but the officer in charge would not speak with me. His name was Corp. Curtis. I am in no way complaining about your officers. I, however, was not treated very fairly when I called last evening because I wanted a ticket/complaint/or at least a slap on wrist for the people involved. Let me explain:
1) This procession should never have been held during rush hour traffic! Hwy. 270 is dangerous and people drive way too fast and there is too much traffic. This soldier's certainly would not have want his family hurt on the interstate taking him to Cedar Hill. People were dead-stopping on the interstate even though the procession was in the far right lane, the other three lanes just stopped. There were many near accidents and possibly were after I drove through. I was in the 2nd to left lane, no way obstructing the funeral procession.
2) I exited off on Gravois (30 W), far right lane. Your police officers went in the left lane to stop any additional on-coming traffic so the procession could exit off 270 into the LEFT lane of 30. Again, I was in the right lane. The St. Louis County officer stopped and turned around at Weber Hill to return on 270 after the procession passed.
3) The road was not closed. (Only for president as far as I know.) Again, the road was not closed. Your officers only had the left lane blocked/closed for the funeral. All other traffic by MO law can proceed as long as they do not interfere (weave in and out )with funeral procession.
Let me say, that I did not know what was happening. I knew the did not have Kennedy coming to STL, at least not yesterday. I was at work all day. No news. Nothing reported on the traffic on the radio driving home.
Anyway, two of these dirty, nasty, renegade, who knows what motorcycle men that were escorting the procession proceeded to stop in front of me in the right lane on Gravois. I had to stop in the middle of an intersection. They proceeded to scream and yell at me about respecting this soldier, etc. One of them climbed off his motorcycle and came over to me and stuck his head in my car continuing to scream at me. I asked him what this was for and he told me I needed to stop as the officers had the road blocked and show some dang respect. #1, the road was not blocked, the funeral was in the other lane. #2, I am proud of our country and sorry for the family, but they had no idea where I was going or anything else. I could have a child at day-care, I could have been sick and racing to the bathroom, I could have a sick parent waiting for me, etc., etc.
#3, They are not law enforcement and had no right to stop in the lane on Gravois and they had no right to scream at me and intimidate and threaten me. If I would have had my pepper spray, I would have used it on this nasty man! He is just a big hoo ha that is not even related to this soldier. The other man did not get off his scooter, but was along side of my passenger window screaming.
I left an abusive husband 1 1/2 years ago and I did not need this intimidation. I was livid and shaking!!
My son is a deputy sheriff in another MO county. I respect police officers. It was not their fault as they were busy with traffic, but I called to make them aware of what was going on during this thing. The St. Louis County officer saw it but of course he was out of jurisdiction.
However, I called last night and your office asked me if I knew about this soldier. Again, I am sorry about him, but I am a taxpayer. I got a speeding ticket a few months ago and paid the fine. I do not deserve to be treated like this. I wanted to let the officer know how these men were acting. Also, they were driving into the turnarounds on Hwy. 30 and then back onto the road. the funeral was much further ahead. One of them nearly got hit by me and other people almost hit him and another as well. I wanted to lodge a complaint about them why they were still there, but no one in your office would take any information or do anything.
This was not a military funeral, even though it was a soldier. There were not military vehicles. It was a funeral and the road was not closed, the lane was closed, I was in the other lane and again, these nasty men had no right to do this and I would have liked them to get a ticket!
I am sorry for the soldier and his family but you cannot let these motorcycle renegades do this. They could have caused several accidents and I really wanted them arrested. If they had any respect for the soldier they would have dressed better and not looked and acted so scuzzy.

Thank you.

You get the drift: she felt intruded by the procession while driving back home. The practicality of not getting home soon enough weighed more than respecting the ceremony. Well, the Sheriff didn't mince his words in his response:

Dear XXXXX:

Yes, you do deserve a response and I am willing to give you one.

I would like to say that I am sorry for the inconvenience we caused you during the funeral procession of Sergeant 1st Class William B. Woods, but I cannot do so. I would ask instead that you take a moment of your time to take into consideration the scope of the event. Your very right to complain was the reason Sgt. Woods fought for his country and ultimately gave his life; thus making the ultimate sacrifice for you and your family.

Let me introduce you to him. After high school, Sergeant Woods entered the Marine Corps. After his contract was up, he joined the Army, where he became a Green Beret. He comes from a long line of military members in his family. His Uncle is a Vietnam Veteran and two of his grandfathers were World War II Veterans. His job in the Army was one of the most dangerous jobs - he was a sniper looking for the bad guys to stop before they killed or injured one of our soldiers. He has numerous decorations to include the Bronze Star and the Purple Heart.

He grew up in Catawissa and was best known by his middle name, Brian. He enjoyed the outdoors, playing sports, and skydiving. He had a wife, Elizabeth, and two daughters, whom he loved dearly. He was a soft-spoken, level-headed young man who was proud to serve his country no matter what the risk. Now, I did not know him, but I wish I did. I am quoting from newspaper articles written about him.

At the young age of 31, he was shot during an engagement with Taliban forces in Ghanzi , Afghanistan . He died of his wounds in Germany on August 16, with his family by his side. He did not choose the time of his death, nor did he choose the time his remains would be brought back to his home in Catawissa. He just did his duty. He was quite a young man.

While you were being inconvenienced in your car on your way home, there were soldiers just like Sergeant Woods carrying 100+ pounds of equipment in 120 degree heat, up some mountain or in the middle of some desert. They will shower out of a helmet liner if they get the chance. They will eat a cold meal of MRE's; something most people would consider garbage. They cannot text their family or friends, or go to McDonalds, or watch TV. They can only continue the mission and look out after the guy to the left and right of them. They don't complain because they know they volunteered. The only thing they ask is that we do not forget the sacrifices they have made.

One of the dirty "big hoo ha" bikers, as you call them, was Brian's uncle, a Vietnam Veteran, like myself. We were not treated with a homecoming. We were spit on and called baby killers by a misguided public. Brian's uncle was giving him the respect that he, himself, never received when he came back and I, for one, am proud of him for doing so.

You say that your brother is a deputy in another Missouri county. I am sure he would be proud to escort the casket of a fallen solder, the same as he would that of a fallen officer. I am also sure he would not agree with your complaint about being inconvenienced.

My mother recently passed away. She was a World War II Veteran, serving the U.S. Army. She would say, maybe you should pick up Sergeant Woods' ruck sack and carry on where he left off. Then you could see first hand what it really is to be inconvenienced.

Per your request, I will forward your complaint to the Prosecuting Attorney's Office for his review. It is my personal opinion that your complaint is self-serving and without merit.

Sheriff Oliver "Glenn" Boyer

He's right; if we're so lazy and inconvenienced we cannot respect the celebration of those who give their lives for protecting our core values, we probably don't belong in a civil society.

Usually when you visit the gym, you don't expect to get shot at by an armed maniac. Well, people at the LA Fitness gym learned their lesson after George Sodini stormed in and began shooting women down at a Latino dance lesson. Just like with the Jokela and Kauhajoki school shootings, liberals remain silent instead of pointing to the core reasons of why fragile individuals today feel the urge to commit massacres. As always, we've got the story, straight out of Sodini's own personal diary:

No girlfriend since 1984, last Christmas with Pam was in 1983. Who knows why. I am not ugly or too weird. No sex since July 1990 either (I was 29). No shit! Over eighteen years ago. And did it maybe only 50-75 times in my life.

…I masturbate. Frequently.

April 24, 2009:
Early last month, we had our second general layoff. I survived. First one was in November. When I began 10 years ago, that used to be a nice place to work. I understand the need to reduce staff when times sour, but this is out of proportion to the economic problems at this time. The economy is shrinking by about 4-5%. They decided not to pay Christmas bonus - for staff that amounts to about 8% of yearly pay. Well, OK. Plus no yearly “merit” raise, another 3.5%. That totals to about 11% cut. Plus two layoffs of 5% staff in each case. Do the math. I know this firm is using this downturn as an excuse to take advanage of a bad situation and kill jobs UNNECESSARILY. The second layoff people who actually did work were let go. We all need to pick up the slack so the company can cut beyond what is necesary. Wasn’t going to mention it, because of all this shit, it is K&L Gates, the large law firm headquartered here in Pittsburgh. Just call it K&L Gates Corporation. Most people there are OK and I would never have a shoot ‘em up there. They paid me for 10 years, so far!

I predict I won’t survive the next layoff. That is when there is no point to continue. RIght now, life is bearable and I can get by indefinitely. Something bad must happen. The paycheck is all I have left. The future holds nothing for me. Twenty five years of nothing fun. I never even spent one weekend with a girl in my life, even at my own place. Also unlikely to find another similar job. I guess then is when I take care of things. I don’t have kids, close friends or anything. Just me here. If you have nothing, you have nothing to lose.

Lonely, afraid to get sacked, and disillusioned by the new liberal age in America, Sodoni eventually began turning all his hate inwards. Like Pekka-Eric Auvinen, Matti Saari and Cho Seung Hoi, Sodini was personally affected by the decay of our society. He failed to communicate with women, he felt close to losing his job, and he watched while all the other losers went from paycheck to paycheck, praising the new President as the great hope of his country. Naturally, he eventually came to a point where he couldn't take it anymore:

August 3, 2009:
I took off today, Monday, and tomorrow to practice my routine and make sure it is well polished. I need to work out every detail, there is only one shot. Also I need to be completely immersed into something before I can be successful. I haven't had a drink since Friday at about 2:30. Total effort needed. Tomorrow is the big day.

His day came, which spelled death for three women and injuries for nine more, before he committed suicide. Another wasted life symbolizing a civilization no longer making new victories, but instead sinking inwards with hate, resentment, fear and weakness. The West suffers from civilization exhaustion, and George Sodini's act is just another symptom of that illness. Some suggest Sodini should have learned to break his negative patterns with women and bang some chicks, but even if that may have postponed the tragedy, liberal America's class warfare, race conflicts, corrupt upper class and debt-ridden economic decline remain a super recipe for yet another massacre in the future.

Corrupt's advice to people angry at society

Avoid becoming another Sodini. Arm yourself with positive goals, self-discipline, a good job, a stable relationship/family, a healthy physique, and the spirit of a compassionate warrior. Life is constant challenge and you were put on this earth to commit yourself to great things, having fun, and then die quietly but happy. The adventure begins where you take off and ends where you give up. To succeed, always live to express victory, not vengeance.

When Kosovo declared independence from Serbia, America cheered while Russia and former Soviet blocs refused to acknowledge the secession. Brett Stevens was quick to explain why:

The American agenda is unconscious. Americanism is a disease, called liberal democracy with consumerism, that can afflict anyone, but it hit the Americans first because they had the richest land, the best population genetics, and a historical founding after the crisis of the church wrecked European politics. Like Israel before them, they were leaders, and so got infected first.

Americanism states that if we just bring freedom, democracy, consumerism and representation to ever[y]one on earth, they'll all suddenly get happy. The origin of this thought is in the idea of the individual who wants the world to be less risky. He or she will opt to mentally control it, forgetting that outside his or her own mind, the world carries on with its own agenda. We think that if we act as if we were immortal gods, and that everyone else being the same way guaranteed our immortal godship, all would be better.

Americanists delight in the splitting off of Kosovo. It hits our emotional factors -- little Kosovan butterflies floating toward the sun, in glorious freedom! Different religions and races working together in the oldest-known multicultural part of Europe! Moderate Islam having champions! Oh and finally: all these people are going to need whatever crap we're selling, and they're so cow-stupid drugged on the salesjob they'll buy anything. Deep fried Coke, Kosovo? Don't mind if you do. Slide card here.

Finger Im Po, Kosovo

Americanism is like most viruses both a constructive and destructive agenda; it thrives on a super power to maintain dominion and keep radical forces at bay ("Neoconservatism"), but it also functions as a market scheme for corporations and business interests to convert old cultures into shopping malls and lame democracies ("globalism"). We gave it the name "Americanism" because, as Brett notes, it hit America first, given its history and demography.

Today it's the dominant paradigm in the West, including a growing number of regions in Eastern Europe. What's interesting about it is that it's not really tied to any nation or race, regardless of how much people like to blame America for it. One of the best examples of this is North Korea's latest cultural imports: Yeah, you guessed it--American fast food!

The first fast-food joint has opened in North Korea, serving up burgers, fries and beer in Pyongyang, and the locals are lovin' it so much that more are planned for the communist capital.

And it's not just junk food. Other symbols of Western capitalism are sprouting up — including a beer commercial on state TV and a convenience store that reportedly was visited in April by leader Kim Jong Il.

Impoverished and isolated North Korea likes to boast of its nuclear weapons and regularly threatens the U.S. and South Korea should they dare invade. Still, it is offering citizens of its capital some of the commonplace delights of its sworn enemies.

Just like China eventually took the step of adopting a moderate form of capitalism to boost its economy and build a powerful middle class, North Korea is either going to Westernize or dissolve within a decade or two. It doesn't really matter that Kim Jong is busy showing off big mojo with missiles, because the virus of Americanism has already hit his nation, too. Soon his army of loyal comrades will ask for Big Mac instead of the Red Bible.