Comments on: South of the border

By: jwillie

jwillie — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 05:11:57 +0000

Mark, Mad Fiddler is obviously correct with the facts regarding Moorish rule and also his understanding of the point i intended to make. I did not learn this from any textbook; instead, it was conveyed to me by the general counsel of a large wireless telco in Buenos Aires during a discussion about the reasons Argentine is the only country to go from being a first world country (at the turn of the 20th century, it’s economy was among the world’s 10 largest to a third world country, as well as the differences between it and the northern LatAm countries. He was a fourth generation Argentine of direct Irish descent, with a surname like McGillicuddy (not his real name). He conveyed to me his belief, held by those of a conservative economic bent in Argentina, that the Spanish culture was (and remains) endemically corrupt, and that the Moors are the source of that cultural DNA. As a frequent traveler to LatAm back then, I discussed his notion with others who traveled there from elsewhere, including several who were Australians, as well as local professional from Chile, Brazil, Venezuela, etc. Most had heard that premise and agreed that the Spanish cultural DNA and the lack of immigrants seeking to build a New World (versus looting) lie at the root of the differences in what evolved in North America vs South America.

The same general counsel also pointed out to me that the US, Central America and the northern cone of South America were far kinder to its indigenous popolation than Chile or Argentina when I inquired about the reasons there are so few mestizos there. That’s probably not in the history books anywhere anymore….

By: Steynianism 180 « Free Mark Steyn!

Steynianism 180 « Free Mark Steyn! — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 00:32:22 +0000

[...] SNUGGLY CUDDLY BADNESS! “A working example of the alliance between Left wing causes and Islamism is the relationship [...]

By: Mad Fiddler

Mad Fiddler — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 18:54:38 +0000

Mark, please keep in mind that the Moors ruled the Iberian Peninsula from about 700 A.D. until 1492, the time of El Cíd, Ferdinand & Isabel, etc. Seven Centuries. That’s about SEVEN TIMES LONGER than the mean & oppressive Europeans ruled their colonies in Africa, for comparison.

The Spanish Conquistadors sent to plunder the southern part of the New World had a Seven Hundred Year legacy of struggling with Islamic oppression. Of course we know that Islam in that period allowed Jews and Christians and others to continue living in their society… so long as they paid the Jizzya and submitted to Islamic domination.

Commenter j willie isn’t suggesting the Spanish included Islamic terrorists in their groups, but that their attitudes about their mission and tactics were profoundly pre-figured by their centuries of struggle to reclaim Spain from the Islamic occupation.

By: someone

someone — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:32:38 +0000

“It would be less dangerous than the Cuban Missile Crisis because in 1962 the US and SU were roughly at parity in terms of nuclear weapons, while Iran hasn’t even tested a single warhead, let alone learned to miniaturize them sufficiently to mount on a medium-range ballistic missile.”

The danger now is that the United States lacks the will, especially if Berry gets elected. 1962 is not 2008. Good for us.

By: Mark

Mark — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 13:52:30 +0000

jwillie’s theory would depend on a kind of stealth Islam surviving in Iberia and migrating to South America. A simpler explanation will suffice: colonialists and firms brought indentured workers from Muslim countries. Later, Lebanese and levanters migrated to escape strife in the old countries. These groups are now receiving Islamist bucks. It’s a similar situation in South Africa.

By: j willie

j willie — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 08:33:36 +0000

The connection between Islam and Latin America is not that mysterious. The Muslims controlled large parts of Spain before they were eventually “evicted”. That’s a fact. A guess on my part is that they raped religiously and otherwise “embedded” their nomadic cultural practices within those conquered regions. Given that Islam is “the law”, and Arabs have always been notoriously corrupt, the Anglo concepts of jurisprudence never had a hope of making much headway in Spain until after its colonial empire dissipated(if then). As several well-educated and capitalistic-minded Latins (from Venezuela and Argentine) reminded me, the conquistadors did not come to America to build a new way of life; they came merely for “loot”, which they stole from the natives and took back to Spain (or elsewhere). The Spanish, perhaps due to their Moorish lineage, also raped religiously in northern LatAm as a means of controlling the indigenous; in southern LatAm, they simply exterminated ALL the indigenous (no mestizos in Argentina and Chile). In summary, from the very beginning LatAm has been the province of the corrupt and crooked. Wealth was therefore concentrated into the hands of the most ruthless, who remain the gatekeepers for anyone wishing to do business in their “neighborhoods”. For a famous example, see how the Cisneros switched their bottling franchise from Coke to Pepsi over a single weekend in response to Coke unilaterally raising the price of syrup. They did not pay Coke a dime for doing so, and Coke knew better than to think a Venezuelan “court” was going to stand behind Coke’s propery rights. One of the most amazing “fuck you’s” ever and a lesson to be heeded by anyone who thinks they can “own” assets in LatAm countries.

By: Mark Dobbins

Mark Dobbins — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 21:20:10 +0000

we’ve got to come up with a sensible way to take the profitability out of the drug trade. i don’t know a better way than to create some path towards legalization of this crap. maybe the best of a series of poor alternatives.

By: Annoy Mouse

Annoy Mouse — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 21:12:12 +0000

“An Islamo-Narco technology exchange would be a worrying
thing”

Let’s look at that for a moment.

Narco-terrorists, what are they trying to achieve? Well they certainly had Marxist roots but it is clear that they need money too, they may well covet money because it can buy things that an ideology can’t offer. The US is a major market for the Narco’s. Who’d want to stir the hive of the US armed forces any more than they already have? I think the FARC are pretty happy with the way things are right now; a vast nether region of Columbia, Equator, and Brazil to practice their brand of separatism and a thriving market in the US for their goods. They need a buffer from their enemies and the tools to maintain it. But they should crave popular support locally more than they need help from abroad to attack the US. And I don’t think the FARC has too much to offer the Islamists. Jungle warfare doesn’t have too much in common with desert warfare and I don’t think Hezbollah has too much to learn from the FARC about IED’s. Purportedly, two IRA operatives were caught trying to train FARC in the use of improvised explosives. It is clear that FARC uses those kinds of attacks to threaten the Columbian government. I have a hard time seeing their aspirations going much further than that.

The Islamo-terrorists on the other hand have a stated desire to attack the US. Every tit-for-tat raises oil prices. The Islamists have the global reach, have financial networks, and have government sponsors. Maybe the grand strategy is to create a network of threats to the US like Iran has successfully arrayed against Israel in the form of a networked terrorist organizations such as Hamas, Hezbollah and others.

By: Al_Batross

Al_Batross — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:50:35 +0000

oooops – “submit” is now “post” ?

By: Al_Batross

Al_Batross — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:48:26 +0000

An Islamo-Narco technology exchange would be a worrying
thing, as the Narcos have some advanced stuff which we
have not yet seen used in terror attacks, such as semi-
submersibles and surgical implants.
Perhaps the lack of terrorist use of Narco technology is
an indication that the relationship is in fact not very
cordial, the two sides having common vices but different
agendas ?
It is unlikely to be a money problem, as neither side is
short of funds ?
Or maybe Chertoff is right, and it is only a matter of
timing ?

ps Newtland, use the submit button for a preview.