Speaker 1: If you want to support the show and get the
episodes early and ad free, head on over to Freeman
Beyond the Wall dot com, forward slash Support. There's a
few ways you can support me there. One there's a
direct link to my website. Two, there's a subscribe star.
Three there's Patreon. Four there's substack. And now I've introduced
gum Road because I know that a lot of our
guys are on gum road and they are against censorship.
So if you head over to gum Road and you
subscribe through there, you'll get the episodes early and ad free,
and you'll get an invite into the Telegram group. So
I really appreciate all the support everyone's giving me, and
I hope to expand the show even more than it
already has. Thank you so much. I want to welcome
everyone back to the Peginiana Show. John Fieldhouse is back.
How's it going on? John?
Speaker 2: Good Well?
Speaker 1: Sir cool? All right, We're going to read this article
here by Martin Van Krevel called Warren Migration. It appears
in I think it's volume ten of There Will Be War,
which was put together by Jerry Pornell. Yes, sir, okay, no,
I was going to ask you, you know, to talkers,
you know, give us an introduction into Van Krevel than
Parnell the work, because you're the one who introduced me
to you know, to this work.
Speaker 2: So yeah, go right, ed, sure, Yeah, just real brief
introduction that I know we're going to talk a different
time about Pornell. But this is Volume Pornell of Jerry
Pornell's There Will Be War Jerry Pornell. You can look
up on Wikipedia who he was. He's most famous as
being a science fiction writer. Most of his career he
was basically doing strategic forecasting and you know, future studies
for the Air Force and NASA and whatnot. He was
actually the guy in charge of the Human Factors Lab
during the Apollo projects, of the guys who assessed astronaut
candidates whether or not they would become astronauts. Which the
most important thing about that is this is a guy
who wrote sci fi, who literally selected who would get
to go into space. And he never actually opened any
of his speeches with that, which tells me more than
anything about the man. So Jim Bang commissioned him to
write a bunch of well, originally one volume. It was
a anthology of called their Rulby War, which would be
about the future of armed conflict. Excuse me. And port
Nell took a combination of science fiction writing, some of
his own stuff, some other people's stuff, along with nonfiction essays,
you know, actual real world essays, some of his own stuff,
a lot more of other people's stuff, and it was
based around a specific topic. He either some cases he
would solicit stuff and say, hey, write me something on this.
Usually it was somebody he went out there. He either
got their work that they'd already written, or he said
he wanted something on a specific theme from people he
you know, both fiction and nonfiction that he said thought
had somebody really important to say with that, and either
they wrote it specifically or in the case of this,
I think it's more of a case of Van Krebld
took what he had on there on the shelf and
probably just turned it into an essay that meant these requirements. Well, sorry,
I'm a little sick, so I'm a little short of breath,
so I have to pause in between. So yeah, there
was one volume, then they did another eight volumes after that,
up to nine volumes. Wall came down in ninety one
and there wasn't much of a market for people talked
about war in the future after ninety one to about
I don't know, ninety eight ninety nine, because we all
thought that we had reached the end of history and
there would never be war again, and we were always
proven wrong anytime people think there will be an end
of war, because again, only the dead have seeing the
end of war. The tenth volume came out twenty ten,
sometime Fox Day. Castilla House got the rights to republish
the first original nine volumes from Pornell. Jerry actually, doctor
Pornell included a new intro to a number of those books,
and like I tell people, just reading the intro and
conclusions to those anthologies, this is some of the best
writing on strategic thinking that I could recommend to anybody.
So you republished those nine books, and then he published
a tenth volume, which this comes from. And here we
are sadly Jerry Pornell died. I believe in twenty seventeen.
Castilia House has released one or two new anthologies of
the same type under different supervision. They've actually talked about
releasing an eleventh volume because they have the rights from
Portnell's state to do stay. But that hasn't happened, so
that's the there will be war. I didn't know if
you had any other questions or comments, but that's.
Speaker 1: Sir, No, that's great. You can still go on Amazon
and by the paperbacks and everything, so they are available.
But you know you can also find if you look online,
you can find them. Why don't you give us an
introduction about Van Kraut and yeah, this essay in particular.
Speaker 2: Sure, okay, Martin van Krevelt, he is in Israelia's story
and as he is Israeli. Yes, he is Jewish. Born
in nineteen forty six in the Netherlands, Rotterdam era area.
Excuse me, obviously, that's a really interesting time to be
born as a you know, a Jewish person in the Netherlands.
I've heard it alleged that his parents he was actually
born in a concentration camp. I don't know if that
was or wasn't the case. Keep in mind that immediately postwar,
a lot of the refugee centers were literally they took
people who were in camps of various types and moved
them next door into wherever the into the barracks wherever
the guards have been located. So when you say he
may have been born in a concentration camp, that doesn't
necessarily mean behind the wire, but that's his birth. Nineteen
fifty they moved immigrated to Israel. Van Krebled actually has
an interesting biography that was published by Castalia House with
an audiobook for version that sadly I think Amazon has
taken down, but if you can get the chance to
get it from Castellia House. Really great book for an
intellectual historian. Which back up a second. The reason I
recommend this and one reason I tell people to go
read Van Krevel is he's probably the premiere scholar of
insurgency and non state warfare in the world right now.
So that's what makes him important. That's why he's taught
all kinds of you know, unusual places like the Marine
Corps Amphibious Warfare College. He's taught a lot at either
him directly or you know, using his materials, as taught
at US Army or excuse me you a United States
Special Operations Command. He's taught at the Mesa's Institute. So again,
he's an interesting guy. He will engage with lots of
people who wouldn't necessarily you would think you would engage
with but he was back to his bio. Yeah, he
immigrated Israel nineteen fifty. Weird time. He was born with
a cleft palada that made him unfit for military service,
which in Israel it's always been kind of weird to
not serve because the implication zero a draft dodger. But
being medically exempt, he got to finish his bachelor's degree early,
and he actually got to start grad school early and
go abroad to get his PhD and come back, and
he was probably the youngest PhD in Israel at that time,
just because again he didn't have to go through military service,
which he went to London School of Economics. His PhD
thesis was on excuse me, the Behrmacht in Greece and Italy.
Excuse me, Greece and Yugoslavia during the Second World War,
which bring how he got into military history, which people
point out the one scholar in his country of his
time without a military record. It's kind of a little
ironic that he's the guy most known for military history,
but that's what he got into. Long story, Throughout his career,
he's always been known as sort of the guy who
either not necessarily pushed the envelope. But the guy who
took hardcore scholarship into sort of like the peripheral subjects
of military history that civilians don't generally pay attention, like
you looked at Command in War literally has a book
called Command in War which deals just that, the history
of command, What is the nature of command? How do
we develop commanders? How have we attempted to develop are
people attempted to develop commanders in the past? What are
the consequences? He got another book on logistics, the History
of Military Logistics, which it's been pointed out that at
that time it was only the second scholarly textbook on
a scholarly research excuse and scholarly book on military logistics
in the world. There was somebody in the Austro Hungarian
Empire produced a book earlier in the twentieth century, but
nobody really paid attention to that. And again Logistics Dry's
War and Army travels on that stomach as a remind everybody,
nobody likes to talk about logistics, but things like food
and ammunition matter a great deal if you want to
win a war, especially if you have you know, advanced
weapons system. If you can't, I tell people. It's you
can have a tank, you can have a fighter plane,
you can have the best, you know, systems in the world.
But if I can't, you know, put fuel and ammunition
in your tank or a fighter playing which you have
is a giant paperweight. He also did he did a
history of the Israel, the Israeli military. He did some
really cool work that I actually used in my grad
school research about the development, the professionalization, development of officer
training in the West, which is really interesting because long
story is short, most of the West we pretend that
we're imitating Prussian German military culture while really doing a
lot of French military culture combined with a lot of managerialism,
and that sort of accounts for a lot of our
problems in war. Probably the thing he's most known for
is ninety one. He did a book called The Transformation
of War that gets into again what it says, you know,
what it says in the box, transformation of war from
a traditional conventional war into unconventional war. And then what
we were beginning to see in ninety one, which we've
very much seen since then, is non state actors becoming combatants.
You know, groups like Hesbalat and whatnot. And the you know,
the breakdown of the station between when is a true
state and what is a non state actor. From there,
he sort of expanded his thesis into the rise and
decline of the state, which is how he got in
with the mesis guys. And at a certain point in
between all those things, he started writing about, you know,
history of equality in the West, history of feminism, stuff,
which really made a lot of people unhappy because essentially
he was accused of becoming an extreme far rightist, whereas
he would just say he's being intellectually honest based upon
the evidence. So he's extremely critical of filminism as well
as a lot of the complaints in things like mine,
affirmative action and minority politics. He's known a lot for
criticizing things like that. So, yeah, that's the man, that's
the work. And again part of why we're why we
know about this guy, why he became so influential. Is
Israeli academic or Israeli academia rather, the language of academics
in Israel is English. Obviously they speak Hebrew as the
first language, but keep in mind throughout Western countries there
are only so many languages that are used for high
level academics, because again, if you have a small population
language then nobody else speaks. It doesn't do you any
good to just do academic in your language, so you
tend to do one of the the big four or five,
like English or French or Russian or Spanish. In Israel
uses English academics. Are you used as English language for
academics rather, So that's how we got to know him.
This book, or excuse me, this essay. It's deals explicitly
with the concept of war and migration. There is titled
War and Migration. The very short I would say conclusion
to it if you have you know it's too long
for you to read, which we're going to read it
for you, is that war and migration are fundamentally the
same things. If you have mass migration, especially assisted mass
migration into an area with a host population has no
connection to you, where you're a foreign outside force migrating
in whether you intend to or not, substantively, that it's
no different than warfare. And I think that pretty much
sums it up. Sir.
Speaker 1: I think it's interesting that his family moved to Israel
in nineteen fifty and he would come to the conclusion
that a mass migration into an area would be considered war.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I think he actually deals with that issue directly.
And here one of the things he brings up in
his biography is his father joked routinely that they moved
to Israel just because they didn't want to feel like
they were Jewish anymore. He comes from a fairly assimilated family.
He describes himself as a Dutch Calvinist who happens to
be an atheist Jew. He says that explicitly in his biography.
He's one of those people who would say it's almost
sort of an accident of ancestry that his family is Jewish,
and he's not anti Semitic in the slightest. He's not,
you know, he's not a self hating Jew in any
sense of the word. But he's somebody's very honest that,
you know, Judaism is it's not really a defining aspect
of himself so much as it's the religion that defined
so much civic life in his country. And even then
he said he said his family would probably much rather
have stayed in the Netherlands, but it wasn't, you know,
exactly the greatest time to be there for anyone and
the fact that he could get to the kid to
Israel sponsored to go to Israel, his family could get
sponsored to go to Israel, whereas they couldn't get sponsored
someplace like the United States. Is just the way it
happened in the accident of history.
Speaker 1: And didn't he write a book that basically pretty much
got him banned from Germany?
Speaker 2: Well, my understanding is the book is actually illegal in
Germany or they, or at least I know the original
cover is illegal called Hitler and Hill Hitler in Hell
excuse me, got some shortness of breath because I'm sick
right now, Yeah, which is also published by Castali House.
When I spoke to him, he described it as an
autobiography of Hitler, because he said, you know, as a
military historian who did so much of World War Two,
everybody said he needed to do a biography on Hitler.
And he made it clear that it's like, what was
he going to say new that nobody else had said?
And he said he decided he was going to do
it as a fictional autobiography. The thing is one of
the issues of any time you actually understand the target
of your research, you very much have to make whatever
effort you can to see from their world view, their perspective.
You know, one of the things that our friend Dale
Cooper has gotten a lot of hate for recently is,
you know, explaining what the issues were concerning Germans in
Germany in nineteen forties. Well, Van Krebbled is one of
the people who did this a lot earlier, probably a
lot deeper than any of our friends have done, and
consequently he made a lot of enemies. It's just Van
Krevelt being Jewish, being Israeli, and his parents being survivors
of the Holocaust. You can't really throw many stones at him.
At least nothing will really stick.
Speaker 1: Gotcha?
Speaker 2: All right?
Speaker 1: And sorry, Matt, if I'd have known you were sick,
I would have postponed this.
Speaker 2: I it's complications of medication. I did not know until
like twenty minutes ago.
Speaker 1: Okay, all right, I'm gonna start reading and stop me whenever.
It seems like mister Parnell throws gets a little boomerash
in the introduction here, So if you want to stop
at any time there, Like I.
Speaker 2: Said, I love Pornell and I tell people to read them,
but not all of his stuff is the greatest stuff ever.
Speaker 1: All right, So This is Parnell's editor's introduction to Warren
Migration by Martin van Krubbled. Martin Van Krubbled is arguably
the world's most pre eminent military historian. Here he presents
us with an analysis of Warren migration and reaches the
inevitable conclusion war is often indistinguishable from migration, although sometimes
it takes longer. The Governor of Louisiana, Bobby Jendhal, himself
an assimilated child of immigrants, says that migration without the
intense of assimilate assimilate assimilation is invasion, an act of war.
It is often said that the United States is a
nation of immigrants. This is true enough, but it is
a nation created by the melting pot by assimilated immigrants
who entered legally and came to be Americans, or at
least were not opposed openly opposed to the idea. As
Bill Buckley said, one could study to become an American
in a way that one could not become Swiss or
a Swede. Assimilation was not always easy, and for freed
slaves it was difficult, but it was generally the goal.
The story of America and migration is as old as America.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I was just going to say, just the idea
that in a European country you can't become you know,
Swiss or Swedish. You know, we've seen a complete attack
on that principle in the decade since then.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I would wonder if I wonder if Pornell would
still feel the same way about after witnessing what's been happening,
whether he'd feel the same way about all.
Speaker 2: This probably more insistent about it being war.
Speaker 1: The more recent migrants do not all accept assimilation as
a goal. They seek to preserve their diversity. E pluribus
unham is not the goal of the Caliphate. Open rejection
of toleration without dimitude is proclaimed. The United States faces
numerous decisions after migration, immigration, and assimilation. Doctor van Krevel
gives us crucial information on the history of migration from
the times before the Trojan War to the present. Starting
the body of the text Warren Migration by Martin van Krevel,
Warre and migration have always been closely related. The relationship
was recorded as early as thirteen hundred BC, when we
were informed the Israelites followed Moses out of e Egypt
to embark upon the enterprise that ultimately led them to
the promised land of Canaan. As you will no doubt recall,
they promptly conquered it, and since that time, for over
thirty three hundred and fifteen years, the link between war
and the large scale movement of people from one place
to another has never been broken. Yet, despite the way
these mass movements of people have had a profound effect
on human history, there has never been a systematic effort
to explore the ways in which the two great phenomena,
war and migration interact. This essay is a preliminary attempt
to rectify the situation one from the Exodus to the Greek,
from the Exodus to the Great Trek. The Old Testament
tells the famous story of the Israelites, which begins sometime
around eighteen hundred BC, when Canaan was visited by famine.
This caused a patriarch, Jacob and his extended family to
travel to Egypt, where they and their offspring were initially
welcomed but later enslaved. Four centuries later, having multiplied considerably,
a leader by the name of Moses arose. Under his
divinely inspired command, they left Egypt. He's jumping out and
ignoring a big part of the story. But that's okay.
I would hope most people know the story. After crossing
the Red Sea, they marched into the Sinai Desert, where God,
who was waiting for them, gave them the Pentateuch. From
the desert, they proceeded very slowly to what is known
today as the Kingdom of Jordan. It is said that
Moses must have been the first general staff officer, for
who else would have required forty years to cross what
is actually a very small desert.
Speaker 2: It's a professional inside joke.
Speaker 1: And after finally arriving on the threshold of the Holy
Land four decades later he died. His successor, Joshua, who
subsequently proved to be a formidable military commander, buried. Moses
then led the Israelites across the river and is a
Canaan proper. These intrepid immigrants swiftly conquered the land and
settled it after killing or enslaving most of the inhabitants.
Whether or not the tale of the conquest of Canon
Is historical has been debated for generations, and particular scholars
have questioned whether the Israelites could realistically have fielded a
six hundred thousand man army, not counting the women and children.
Israel's first Prime Minister, David Ben Gurion, fancied himself a
biblical scholar and considered six thousand to be a more
acceptable figure. His view brought him into immediate conflict with
Israel's Orthodox Rabbis, who consider literally every word of the
Old Testament to be gospel truth. That's a funny, uh,
And keep in mind the context of in Israeli.
Speaker 2: He's basically pointing out that internal society being divided between
those who are religious and those who aren't. And the
biggest issue in modern Israel has always been that non
religious people are always making religious based arguments that they
don't believeing in any other circumstance.
Speaker 1: Yeah, even I read Shahak's book Jewish History Jewish Religion.
He makes that point throughout. But for our purposes it
does not really matter whether the story is historic, historical,
or symbolic. Still less do the details concern us. What
is important is that after all these years, the story
of geographical relocation and conquest is still commemorated by all
Jews around the world. In other words, migration was war
in fact, insofar as ancient war frequently involved not only
soldiers in armies, but entire nations who left their homeland
mitmann undros undewagen with man and horse and wagon. As
the Germans say, war was migration.
Speaker 2: And this is more than anything, is the most important
part of the essay. If you got this, highlight this
right here, I would tell the reader that is the
fundamental thesis of this essay.
Speaker 1: The exodus was far from the only episode of its kind.
For example, the Dorians are believed to have entered Greece
from the north in the years around eleven hundred BC,
as with the conquest of Canaan. The question of whether
the Drian migration really took place or not has been
much disputed. Thucydides has the following to say about the
topic of the introductions to his book on the Peloponnesian War,
quoting the country now called Hellas had no settled population
in ancient times. Instead, there was a series of migrations,
as the various tribes, being under the constant pressure of
invaders who were stronger than they were, were always prepared
to abandon their own territory, and the belief that day
to day necessities of life could be secured just as
well in one place as in another. They showed no
reluctance in moving from their homes, and therefore built no
cities of any size or strength, nor acquired any important resources.
Where the soil was most fertile, there were the most
frequent changes of population, as in what is now called Thessaly,
in Boetia, in most of Peloponne except Arcadia, and in
others are the richest parts of Hellas for in these
fertile districts, it was easier for individuals to secure greater
powers than their neighbors. This led to disunity, which often
caused the collapse of these states, which, in any case
were more likely than others to attract the attention of
foreign invaders. There's a lesson for today, isn't it. I
guess that's the eternal lesson.
Speaker 2: Very little in human nature has ever changed.
Speaker 1: It is interesting to observe that Attica, which because of
the poverty of our soil, was remarkably free from political disunity,
has always been inhabited by the same race of people. Indeed,
this is an important example of my theory that it
was because of migrations that there was uneven development elsewhere.
For when people were driven out from other parts of
Greece by war or by disturbances, the most powerful of
them took refuge in Athens. As being a stable society.
They then became citizens and soon made the city even
more populous and it had been before, with the result
that later Attica became too small for inhabitants, and colonies
were sent forth to Ionia.
Speaker 2: Without getting too bogged down in the weeds of Greek history,
for an American especially, it's important to understand Greece obviously
number one. The area extended far beyond what's modern Greece, right,
so Asia Minor, you know, the whole peninsula that makes
the bulk of Turkey was historically part of Hellas, and
it started to extended north and east into the Balkans.
But anyways, that are very jagged coastline, which means, despite
being a relatively small country, you have huge coast lines throughout,
some of which actually lead to inland rivers that go
pretty deep inland. And within the country itself proper, you
have a few very fertile areas combined with lots of
areas that are either relatively mountainous, very rough, or somewhat arid,
so it's a weird population center. A situation in Greece
historically where you have some areas that support large populations,
a coastline that you can use to go basically anywhere
in the world, and large parts of the interior of
the country that are just rough that nobody really wants
to live there.
Speaker 1: There are other examples besides the Israelites and the Dorians,
the Etruscans migrated from Armenias to central Italy around eight
to fifty BC. According to a recent study, the.
Speaker 2: Guy Gales's outs pronounced I don't know if these are
the same gales from Ireland in Scotland, That's what.
Speaker 1: I was wondering. The Gaels launched numerous attacks on the
Hellenistic kingdoms and the Balkans and Asia Minor in the
third and second centuries BC, although they were ultimately repulsed,
and in fifty eight BC, as Caesar tells us, the
Helvetti wished to migrate from their homeland in southern Germany
to southeastern Gaul and asked him the newly established Proconsul
of Gaul, for permissions across Wano occupied territory on the way.
After he refused to grant it, they fought him, were
badly beaten, and were forced to turn back. That failed
migration triggered a whole series of wars, which ended in
the Roman conquests of the entirety of Gaul within six years.
The nomadic Arabs, who occupied much of the territory of
the Byzantine Empire in the six and eighth centuries, provide
another informative example. So did the Magyars, whose original home
was in the southern Ukraine and who reached what is
Hungary today in the tenth century AD. Their westward migration
was halted in nine fifty five when they were defeated
at the Battle of Lechfield near present day Augsburg. The
Mongol and Manchurian conquests of China twelve oh five to
seventy nine and sixteen eighteen to sixteen forty four, respectively,
also led to large scale migrations as various people retreated
to the west, displacing other nations in turn.
Speaker 2: And just for contact. Say, the huns advance into western
Europe probably was a consequence of much earlier expansion from
what is currently Mongolia, you know, putting pressure in their homelands.
The Hawnish ownlands.
Speaker 1: The largest and most famous migratory episode, if that is
the correct label for a process that stretched out over
several centuries, was the so called Vulgar vander Rung, the
migration of peoples. It's entirely transformed Europe from about the
middle of the second century AD to the middle of
the sixth century, destroying countless old polities and creating an
equally large number of new ones. Driven out of the
east by their more formidable neighbors, wave after wave of
barbarian tribe crashed into central and western Europe. Some bypassed
the Roman empires to the north, whereas others crossed its
frontiers and entered its territory to wage war on the inhabitants.
The Saxons reached Spain, the Visigoths southwestern France, Spain and Portugal.
The Vandals invaded North Africa. The Burgundyans, whose original home
was in Poland, traveled to the land that is now
named after them Burgundy. The Huns, whose original habitat was
the caucas the Caucaus Caucasus. Is it Caucasus or I
never remember how to pronounce it.
Speaker 2: I think it's usually pronounces Caucuses.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, because that makes it sound plural. That's why
it doesn't sound right in my head.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it is where we get the word Caucasian.
Speaker 1: Though, correct.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: The Huns, whose original habitat was the Caucasus and Central Asia,
traveled west, slaying and conquering everyone and everything on their way,
until a coalition of Romans and Visigots finally stopped them
at Cologne in four fifty one. But the defeat of
Attila did not, by any means, put an end to
the series of migrations. The Huns were followed by the Lombards,
the Lombards by the Bulgars, and between them they changed
the maps and the very name place names of Europe.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and just so they know the Huns. Obviously, the
Huns we know about who probably had from Central Asia
putting pressure again, probably an expansion out of what is
now Mongolia. But the Voltagurv on the Rung that's literally
the Germanic people's migrations and which is a huge part
of what destroyed the Roman Empire. It's also why we're
speaking a Bastardized Germanic language in English.
Speaker 1: All these migrating people as well as many others that
could be mentioned were relatively simple tribal societies. In terms
of organization, technology, and military, civilization, literature of the arts,
and the like. They could not match the settled, more
civilized societies they encountered and often conquered. The Book of
Joshua describes Canaan as the land bristling with fortified cities,
and yet they were quickly defeated by the nomadic Israelites
at a time when Roman power, encompassing practically all the
lands around the Mediterranean, was approaching in Zeni. Rome's enemies
in Germany and Gaul consisted of endlessly shifting tribes who
lived in wooden huts. Four centuries later, the Germanic Visigoths
sacked Rome. The Huns Ammianus Marcellinius Marcellinus says were a
race savage beyond all parallel. He described them in distinctly
unfavorable terms, quoting they are certainly in the shape of men,
however uncouth, and are so hardy that they require neither
fire nor well flavored food, but live on the roots
of such herbs as they get in the fields, or
on the half raw flesh of any animal, which they
merely warm rapidly by placing it between their own thighs
and the back of their horses. They never shelter themselves
under roofed houses, nor is there even to be found
among them a cabin thatched with reeds. But they wander about,
roaming over the mountains and the woods, and accustom themselves
to bear frost and hunger and thirst from their very cradles.
Speaker 2: Just to a point when he talks about, you know,
sitting on stuff on horseback in order to make meat
edible if you salt it, and then you do that,
it's called jerky.
Speaker 1: The anonymous Roman author of de Rebus Belicus, writing early
in the fifth century a d. Speaks of other migratory
tribes of bang barbarians. Baying may have been all that
these barbarians were capable of, but they did so with
sword in hand. Although the process might take time, such
as the five hundred and fourteen years separated the Simbrian
War from the Sack of Rome, very often the barbarians
eventually managed to defeat their more developed opponents and take
over their lands. There are two cardinal factors that explain
the frequent victory of the simple and less civilized migrants
over their more sophisticated stationary opponents. First, while the settled
societies enjoyed technological superiority in terms of jewels of energy
available per capit, the primary sources of mechanical energy were
stationary devices such as windmills and water mills. When it
came to war, in battle, which are intrinsically mobile, both
the civilized soldiers and their barbarian enemies depended entirely upon
the muscles of men and beasts. As a result, most
of the technological advantage enjoyed by the civilized societies was
irrelevant because it could not be brought to bear on
the battlefield. Second, the migrations were usually long drawn out processes.
Though armed invasions and battles were frequent, there were also
long periods of peace. Therefore, there was plenty of time
for both sides to take each other's measure and to
learn from each other. Renegades and captives taken a war
often played a large role. This exchange of information almost
invariably were to the benefit of the less civilized parties.
For example, the Mongol armies which conquered China and came
close to overrunning Europe in the mid thirteenth century, included
many specialists who utilized technologies learned from the Chinese, including
various types of siege engines. Two hundred years later, the
Ottoman Turks did the same in their westward drive towards
Constantinople and beyond.
Speaker 2: Yeah, this is a really important part to understand that
migration is conquest. The assimilation by the migrants is a
huge part of how they win the Siege of Constantinople,
most of the artillery pieces were actually manned by Christians
and basically all of their cannons were produced by Christians.
The Mongol con quest of China, all the siege engines
were you know, various Chinese people, usually ethnic Chinese specialists.
And even then the Germanic migrants migrations, we know just
upon some weird y half of groups you see in
parts of Europe that they had to have picked up
and assimilated some amount of people in their migrations and
integrated them into the great cultures. So you know, in
boasts of the words, the ability to assimilate is part
of how you conquer the enemy.
Speaker 1: The migratory phenomenon was nuts. That's yeah, that's uh, learning
the language, looking like them, dressing like them and sometimes.
Speaker 2: Key technologies, right, like one of the most obvious ones
or if you were talked to a military store and
maybe not to the layman, is you know, different ways
of putting devices on horses or animals, you know, like
I think it was the Onns who actually introduced the
stirrup to Western Europe, which you know may not sound
very important to us, but understand, until you put a
stirrup on the horse or on the saddle, you know,
a cavalryman couldn't use a lance and couldn't charge with that,
which meant that prior to that, cavalry was mostly something
used for scouting and on the screens the outside of
the formation, where suddenly, with a stirrup you start getting
bigger and bigger cavalry and eventually like heavy armored knights
in the Middle Age. So yeah, technology is a huge
part of what spreads and it's not something that's readily
apparent at the time.
Speaker 1: A lot of times, the migratory phenomenon was not solely
a Eurasian one. Africa also abounds with stories of armed migration,
some historical, others mythological. Three thousand years are said to
have passed since the Bantu tribes began expanding out of
their original homelands in what are today Cameroon and Nigeria,
and now they can be found all over the central
and southern parts of the continent. The Zulu established Quasulu
Nation in South Africa after migrating southward along Africa's east coast.
Many of these migrations bear strong resemblances to the exitus
described in the Pentateuch. In every case, the movement was
said to be have been initiated by one or more gods.
On their way, the migrants witnessed many different miracles which
confirmed that there were in fact they were in fact
doing the right thing. One of the best known African
migration tales is that of Ashanti Marshall tribe that migrated
westward from Ghana into the Ivory Coast, who on their
way received sikadois the Golden Stool, a royal and divine
throne believed to have housed the spirit of the Ashanti people.
One of the last and most peculiar African migrations was
the Trek of the Boors. The Bores were European settlers
of Dutch and Hugenot descent who left Cape province in
order to remain independent in the face of a growing
British presence there. The Trek lasted from eighteen thirty five
to eighteen forty six and was unusual in the sense
that the Boers set out to settle in lands inhabited
by less civilized and less technologically advanced Kafirs, mostly Bantu
and hot and taught tribes, thus reversing the usual pattern
of migratory conflict. But like these less civilized antecedents, the
Bores never hesitated to use their superior arms against anyone
who stood in their way. The Trek also resembled other
previous migrations in the sense that the migrants were strict
Calvinists who believe they acted under divine guidance. Visiting the
region around Pretoria back in late nineteen ninety four, I
saw the famous monuments of the war trekkers. It must
be said, to the credit of the African National Congress
who took over South Africa after apartheid, the region's new
rulers have not demolished it yet.
Speaker 2: Keep in mind these things were written in twenty seventeen
at the latest tenets. Before you know, a lot of
destruction and part of it, I think has to do
with the fact that the More Monument is sort of
in the middle of nowhere, and urban blacks probably don't
want to visit that area.
Speaker 1: So migration was war and war was migration. Aside from
relatively equal situations in Africa and North America, when tribal
societies fought each other, militarized migrations were chiefly a matter
of less developed mobile societies attacking more developed, settled civilizations.
That likely explains why in the more technol logically advanced
parts of the world, migration wars came to an end
in the fifteenth century, as the history of the American
West illustrates. Once tribal warriors were able to lay their
hands on modern weapons, particularly firearms, they quickly learned to
use them just as well as their opponents. But what
they could not do was produce the weapons and require
ammunition for themselves. The development of firearms was a decisive
shift in the balance of power towards more technologically advanced societies,
particularly those of the West. How long this advantage will
last as an open question, but there are indications that
it is already on the wane. Section two Ethnic cleansing.
Thucidides illustrated how the process works in both directions. Migration
usually leads to war, but war can also lead to migration.
For after war takes place, one of the common consequences
is to force migration that is currently known as ethnic cleansing.
Some of the earliest migrations of this kind are recorded
in the Old Testament. The Assyrian kings had an established
policy of exiling half the population from the lands they conquered.
One they followed after conquering the Kingdom of Israel. A
century later, the Babylonians sent part of the population of
Judah into exile after subjugating that kingdom. The small quasi
Jewish communities in Kurdistan, as well as the larger pre
nineteen forty eight ones in Iraq, are said to consist
of descendants of the Israelites forced to leave Israel by
the Assyrians. Both empires have made a habit of bringing
in other peoples to take place of those that they
had exiled. Thus, the Samaritans, a small community of under
a thousand people who currently live in Israel and the
West Bank, are believed to be descended from settlers brought
into the region by its Assyrian conquerors during the seventh
and sixth centuries b C.
Speaker 2: And part of this too, the unstated part, is internal
Israeli politics about who's really Jewish, which has always become
an issue, especially after the last major Jewish populations have
migrated to Israel in the United States. So it's you know,
they're looking at smaller and smaller populations and arguing amongst
themselves so whether or not they are really Jewish and
whether or not they can really be assimilated into Israel.
Speaker 1: The spectacular release at the British Museum that originally decorated
the palace of the Assyrian king Senecareb reigned seven oh
six to sixt eighty one BC at nine at ninevah
provide us with some idea of what Assyrian ethnic cleansing
operation may have looked like. The subject of the release
is the siege of Lakish, a city in the Judean
Plane in seven oh one BC. In addition to the
military operations, they also show us what happened to the
prisoners and deserters who left the city. Men were decapitated.
There are a lot of headless corpses lying around or
impaled women and children were left more or less unharmed,
and were taken away by the victors, accompanied by wagons
laden with lout. Since Lakish was never rebuilt, the captives
presumably once a place, from whence they never returned. This
suggests that women and children represented the majority of those
who went into exile, although accounts from the Old Testament
suggest that on at least some occasions men were spared
to share their fate, very.
Speaker 2: Often depending on the fane skills their ability that were
wanted by a conquer.
Speaker 1: The Romans preferred not to exile those they defeated, but
to subjugate rule and levy taxes on them. Ciso called
such taxes a perpetual penalty for defeat. However, during the
period between two hundred BC and one a d they
regularly took enormous numbers of prisoners. These prisoners, men, women
and children, were then transported to the slave markets, especially
the famous ones of Roads and Delas, and sold there.
Entire communities, including great cities such as Corinth and Carthage,
were left almost devoid of inhabitants. This conquest, best based
slave trade brought a wide variety of different tribes, cultures,
and religions together and transformed Rome, the greatest slave market
of all, into a new Babylon. The men who followed Spartacus,
the Thracian gladiator who led the great slave volts against
Rome in seventy three to seventy one BC, came from
many different lands. Spartacus's goal was for them to all
return to their countries of origin, but his men refused,
preferring to stay in Italy where they could kill, pillage,
and rape. They were eventually defeated at Bronzanium by eight
legions led by Marcus Licinius Crossus, and hundreds were crucified
along the Appian Way. Spartacus himself is believed to have
been killed in the battle, but his body was never found.
Speaker 2: That's part of why we say there's only one successful
slave revolt in history, that's Haiti. And again the Spartacus
revolt could potentially have been successful, but they decided they
just wanted to hang out and loiter in the area
that they just escaped from, so they were destroyed in
the open.
Speaker 1: In sixty six to seventy AD and again in one
thirty five to thirty seven eighty, the Jews of Palestine
rose against their Roman conquerors. The Romans suppressed both rebellions
and responded by engaging in extensive ethnic cleansing. Hundreds of
thousands of people were driven out, and, to use an
expression coin, nearly two thousand years later, Jerusalem was made Judenfrei.
Jews were prohibited from living in the city and even
entering it. Such episodes are by no means rare in history.
The reason so many Jewish examples exist is that despite
the forced migrations they experience, they managed to preserve their
religion and their ethnic identity. Other peoples forced to leave
their homelands were either less fortunate or less determined. That
does not necessarily mean that Jews kept their race pure, however,
for as modern genetic studies show, Jews settled in different
countries tend to genetically resemble the host populations more than
they do each other.
Speaker 2: And again, He's willing to stick a thumb in the
eye of sort of mainstream opinion in his own country.
Speaker 1: Not all force migrations were the results of war. For example,
throughout the Middle Ages and the early Modern period, Jews
were regularly expelled from many countries, but this had little
to do with war. During the century and a half.
After the Reformation, there was reciprocal expulsions of Catholics by
Protestants and Protestants by Catholics throughout Europe. The most famous
example of these forced migrations was Louis the Fourteenth decision
to revoke the Edict of Nantes in sixteen eighty five,
which resulted in four hundred thousand Hugenots being exiled from France.
Even in Switzerland, the Cantons were divided on the basis
of being Catholic or Protestant, and much smaller force migrations
took place. Large scale ethnic cleansing again raised its ugly
head during the early years of the twentieth century. The
Balkan Wars led to the expulsions of Muslims from the
Balkan states that broke free of the Ottoman Empire. Soon
after the outbreak of World War One, the Turks, fearing
lest the Christian Armenians might aid and have bet the
Russian enemy, enacted the first modern genocide. Hundreds of thousands
of Armenian men were massacred. The rest of the population
was expelled and driven to the Syrian desert, where they
were left to die. The Turks also expelled the Jews
of southern Palestine and drove them from the drove them north,
although some were taken to Alexandria Egypt by American ships.
No sooner had the Great War ended than the Turks
again initiated a massive ethnic cleansing campaign, this time against
the Greeks of Western Anatolia. This region has been home
to important Greek communities for over three millennia, but barely
five thousand Greeks remained there today.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I would see Dale Cooper's got a really good
episode with Jacko Willink about the Armenian genocide. But one
of the consequences of this is that's why you have
ethnic Armenian communities throughout the former Soviet Union, not just
in Armenia proper, but other places. You have ethnic Armenia
and communities are big in Israel, you have them big
in a number of other countries. And even then, the
issue of who was considered Greek, the Turks actually called
them Romanis, I literally called them Romans, which was a
Greek speaker of the of the Eastern Orthodox Church. So
a lot of times that's the only thing that firmly
defines who's Greek in Asia minor, just because most of
the people who are Turks or call themselves Turks aren't
even really descendant from the Turkish people proper. There, you know,
descendants of Greeks who converted and had some amount of
intermixing with outsiders. So again, war, our migration is war.
Speaker 1: The period nineteen nineteen nineteen twenty one also witnessed the
expulsion of Hungarians from Armania and of Germans from what
had been West Prussia and Cilicia but was claimed by
Poland after the war. Twenty years later, the jack Boot
was on the other foot, having defeated the Polls. Hitler
had expelled the masses of them from from Western Poland
and replaced them with Germans. He also expelled the Jews
of Alsace, Lorraine, driving them into France, after which they
were subsequently re expelled to the gas chambers in Eastern Europe.
As these events touch upon one of history's most infamous crimes,
it is important to note that the series of complicated
campaigns of expulsions directed primarily against Europe Europe's Jews, Gypsies
and Slavs that ended in the murder of millions could
never have taken place if it had not been for
the cover provided by war. In Hitler's mind, the war
and the end loos sung de Judenfraj or final solution
of the Jewish Question, were linked. Speaking to intimates, in
August nineteen forty one, the Fear of the Third Right
claimed the fact that so many Germans had lost their
homes after World War One justified the humane expulsion of
Germany's Jews. Five months later, at the Vance Conference, the
policies that lay the foundation for the Holocaust were worked
out detail.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and again that needs to be very much understood
by Americans. I'm not in any way justifying any of
the you know, the genocides of the twentieth century. But
keep in mind that there was a situation post World
War One where large portion, maybe even the majority, of
ethnic Germans in Europe lived outside of Germany, Austria and
Switzerland proper.
Speaker 1: There were more forced migrations to the East. After being
unexpectedly attacked by his ally, Hitler, in violation of the
nineteen thirty nine mallets off Ribbentrop pack Stalin ordered the
evacuation of the tatters. Should that be is that tatters
or should be pronounced totter? The totters totter.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the half breed descendants of Mongols.
Speaker 1: Okay from the Crimea. His rationale was the same as
many others before him. He feared that totters might join
the advancing Germans. But the expulsion of the totter from
was nothing compared to the huge migrations it took place
from nineteen forty four to nineteen forty six.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and to his point, a large number of totters
did side with the Third Reich. Yeah. And again these
are the half free descendants of Mongols.
Speaker 1: As the Soviet Red Army marched west towards Berlin, it
was often joined by local militias in the eastern European
countries it occupied. Twelve million Germans were driven out of
their homelands in Romania, Hungary, Ygoslavia, Slovaia and Croatia, Czechoslovakia, Poland,
West Prussia, East Prussia and Cilicia, and about one six
of them died in the process. As the war came
to an end, tens of millions of people were on
the move across the continent. Refugees, slave workers, former concentration
camp prisoners, prisoners of war. Almost all had nothing but
rags to their names and were trying to either escape
the advancing Russians or simply return home.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and again that this part cannot be really emphasized
enough because it's something Americans we like to think that,
you know, the war ended nineteen with this beautiful parade,
and suddenly there was peace throughout Europe, which is complete
and total bullshit. You know, obviously everything the Red Army
was doing, you know, in their territory of operation, which
again Daryl Cooper has a really good episode on this
called The Anti Humans. But we tend to think of
countries and their borders on the ground being very concrete,
while ethnic groups are kind of soft, whereas Eastern Europe
it's sort of the opposite. Ethnic groups tend to be
fairly cohesive, fairly distinct. But even if you have a
distinct country, you know, where does the border end. That
changes a lot throughout history, especially in Eastern Europe. To
the point with Ukrainians, there's all the Ruthenian people absolutely
exist throughout history. The numbers of them that are called
Ukrainian is always a matter of debate. But because Ukraine
literally means the borderland. But where exactly is the Ukraine, Well,
it's somewhere between the eastern part of Russia and you know,
Central Poland, and that's gone back and forth throughout history,
which is part of the current fight in Eastern Europe.
That to be clear, I don't have any side in
that fight. But again, there are ethnic groups that are
on both sides of different lines throughout the world, throughout
Eastern Europe, with huge number of ethnic Germans that have
been there for centuries, who Styalin forcibly moved west towards
into Eastern Germany or excuse me, into what became the
Democratic Republic of Germany East Germany. And keep in mind
some of these groups had been gone for so long
that they never even bothered to speak proper modern Germany,
which was an invention of the you know, the nationalist
movements of the nineteenth century. There had been German languages,
there are German languages, but you know, a formal German
hadn't been established. So these are people, in some cases
had hard times even communicating in proper German, who were,
you know, uprooted from places they'd been for four hundred
years or so. So it is impossible for Americans understand
the amount of force migration that took place after the
inter fighting in World War Two.
Speaker 1: Well, he talks about people trying to escape the advancing
Russians here famously, there are many reports of Well, there
are reports of a few camps that were liberated and
the prisoners chose to escape with the Germans rather than
wait for the Russians to show up.
Speaker 2: There are multiple cases, in some cases maybe half or
more of the prisoner population going with them.
Speaker 1: Yep, the force migrations and ethnic cleansing did not end
in nineteen forty five. The nineteen forty seven Indo Pakistani
Wars divided British India into two different countries and caused
millions of people terrified by the interreligious violence to cross
the newly established frontier between India and Pakistan in both directions,
triggered by the flight of ten million Bengali refugees from
what was then known as East Pakistan. The Third Indo
Pakistani War, which broke out in nineteen seventy one, brought
about the creation of the independent Bangladesh. After the Pakistani surrender,
the refugees returned and a smaller those still considerable number
of Pakistanis were driven out of Bangladesh into West Pakistan.
The end of the Vietnam War led to the expulsion
in two hundred and fifty thousand ethnic Chinese. Ho is
that hoa?
Speaker 2: Oh? I think it's oh, yeah, Chinese and they don't
even usually use that usually they call them in real life.
But yeah. There are huge numbers of ethnic Chinese in
Southeast Asia, and despite being there for centuries, they are
still distinctively ethnic Chinese, despite the fact that the average
American thinks that all the East Asians look the same.
Speaker 1: The end of the Vietnam War led to the expulsion
in two hundred and fifty thousand ethnic Chinese hoa from
that country, as well as the migration of the two
million Vietnamese boat people, over half of whom ultimately settled
in the United States. The nineteen eighty Russian invasion of
Afghanistan caused as many as a million Afghanis across the
border into Pakistan's northwestern provinces. Despite being settled in refugee
camps there, they eventually came to jeopardize their host control
over the region, a problem that may very well present
itself in other parts of the world in the future.
Some of the wars that have taken place in Africa
since the nineteen seventies, particularly those in the Sudan Eritrea, Somalia, Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi,
the Congo, Liberia, Angola and Mozambique, also led to enforced
migration on a massive scale, and after forty two year hiatus,
ethnic cleansing returned to Europe when, following the death of
longtime dictator Tito Yugoslavia broke up when Bosnia hers and Coovino,
whose population is predominantly Muslim, declared independence from Belgrade. The
Serb minority and the province embarked on an all out
effort to avoid coming under Muslim rule. Their efforts were
supported by the Serbian government under Slovanan Melosavi, who provided
its kinsmen with men, weapons and money. The Bosnian War,
which land lasted from nineteen ninety two to nineteen ninety five,
witnessed widespread ethnic cleansing. The war was brought to an
end by NATO aircraft launching air strikes at the stronger
Serbian forces. It later turned out that there was little
difference between the two sides, both of whom committed atrocities,
including mass executions. The number of people who displaced who
were displaced by that war has been estimated at two
point two million, including two hundred and fifty thousand Serbs
who were driven out of the Krajina Priina.
Speaker 2: Thank you just because I watched CNN in the day, That.
Speaker 1: Fact did not prevent the world, with President Clinton at
its head, from pointing to the Serbs as the culprits
and condemning them by every available means. The current wars
in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and several other countries in Asia
and Africa are also creating large numbers of Migraines. Often
they are prepared to do almost anything to escape the fighting.
Even though life is a refugee is a perilous endeavor.
Women are in particular dangerous. They run the risk of
being kidnapped and sold as prostitutes. According to the New
York Times, there are currently sixty million people who have
been forced to leave their homes. That represents just under
one percent of the entire global population. Of the sixty
million homeless, one third are refugees who are presently living abroad.
The remaining forty million have been displaced by the civil
war but remain inside their own countries. Since the figures
include millions of children who were born to refugees, even
second generation refugees or displaced people after they fled, it
is possible that they are inflated. That is especially true
in the case of the Palestinians, whose number whose number
the Palestinian authority puts at at a literally incredible six million. Yeah,
that number is literally incredible. However, there is every sign
that the number of displaced people is only going to
grow and increase the size of the global mass migration
in coming years.
Speaker 2: Like I said, there's always a lot of subtext with
his writing.
Speaker 1: Same with Lipbakret Litwakret.
Speaker 2: Yeah, which again both of them are reading people we
should read.
Speaker 1: Yes, absolutely. For example, Israel's war of Independence, which the
Palestinians call the Nakba Catastrophe, actually led to the expulsion
of about six hundred thousand people. The June nineteen sixty
seven war created at most another three hundred thousand refugees. Nevertheless,
the the refugee camps near Jericho have become ghost towns
and have largely remained so to the present day. As
of twenty fifteen, large numbers of Palestinian refugees are scattered
in the Goza strip, the West Bank Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon,
while others have joined the ongoing Muslim migration to Europe
and the United States because Israel's Arab neighbors find it
useful to have no intention of permitting it to go away.
The plight of the displaced Palestinians is both the most
persistent refugee situation as well as the one that has
attracted the most sustained international attention. Unfortunately, the future does
not bode well, since the possibility that Jordan will eventually
fall to daesh Isis is all too real. Should that
come to pass, it is not inconceivable that the government
in Jerusalem would deem it necessary for reasons of national
security to drive out the two million Palestinians remaining in
the West Bank as well. Yeah, huh, he is.
Speaker 2: It was. I guess we're probably near the point where
we want to take a break. But part of what
you have to understand about voud Kravel is, despite being
a national security historian who does so much on special operations,
he is really persona non grata with the Israeli Defense Force.
So he's known for having a lot of sources who
are again, because everybody serves in the military veterans who
give him information and leaked documents to him, but the
formal IDF has repeatedly criticized about all kinds of things,
to the point that he was not allowed to give
speeches to like IDF officer schools because they were worried
about him starting fights.
Speaker 1: That's great, all right, we'll cut it here and pick
up for part two. I think we can get through
this in two parts, right.
Speaker 2: Yeah, let me see you just pulling up.
Speaker 1: Yeah, see how many pages we have left?
Speaker 2: Yeah, we only got like five pages left.
Speaker 1: You want to finish it now?
Speaker 2: Yeah, we can do that.
Speaker 1: Okay, have you got time?
Speaker 2: Yeah? All right.
Speaker 1: Three Voluntary war related migration. Though the use of force
is war's outstanding characteristic, not all war related migrations are
carried out by force. Very often people decide to leave
a war torn region out of their own free will.
One reason for doing so, which played an important role
during the twentieth century, is the desire to avoid conscription.
In the decades following the development of the French Revolutionary Army,
conscription became common through Europe and was origidly enforced. Many
of those willing to evade forcey evade forced military service
went to the USA, the British colonies in Latin America.
Speaker 2: A huge portion of the American excuse me, ethnic German
migration in North America was from people who wanted to
avoid conscription. Ironically, a huge amount of the of israelis
because again I tell people, if you ever get a chance,
watch the travel channel, Inevitably you'lls hear about somebody from
Israel who's got to go back to take over a
family business. And the unstated part is this is somebody
who went abroad for school, made sure they were gone
so long they couldn't get drafted, and now that they're
old enough and they can't be drafted, they're going home
because you know there's no risk to them.
Speaker 1: Today. Eritrea is the country that produces the largest number
of refugees trying to avoid national service, military or other.
The country is governed by a desk spot named Isaiah's Afwerki.
Freedom and human rights are unknown. Men and unmarried women
are conscripted did often for life. This has caused thousands
of Eritreans, particularly young men, to flee to Ethiopia. From there,
they usually continue on towards any other country they can enter.
Legally or illegally.
Speaker 2: Again another part of the Subtexas. He's from a country
that tries to have universal conscription to include women.
Speaker 1: War also leads to migration in another way. From the
earliest days of war, Victoria's soldiers have been besieged by
the women of the defeated in search of safety, food,
and not least sheer masculine force. Yeah, that's a very
that's him being diplomatic.
Speaker 2: What a polite way to say that.
Speaker 1: That still remains the case. Armies often prohibit frightenization, as
the Allied ones did in Germany after World War Two.
Some states even forbade marriages between their troops and women
from the occupied population. Usually these efforts are to no avail,
and World War two American soldiers, overpaid, over sex and overhear,
as their British allies described them, often had the time
of their lives. After the war's end. Most of them
eventually returned home alone, but an estimated sixty thousand American
soldiers brought back a signorina or a Freudlein as a
wartime souvenir.
Speaker 2: Eventually, it got so common for them to seek other
ways of getting their their girlfriend's home that Eventually, the
occupation command just abandoned the restrictions and allowed them to marry.
Speaker 1: But Bubba. The Korean War is known to have produced
an even larger migration, most likely because of the ban
on marrying Japanese women. Japan served as a principal US
base during the Korean War was lifted from nineteen forty
two to nineteen fifty two. The number of Gis who
married foreign women was around one million.
Speaker 2: That's also a very polite way of saying that generation
of Japanese men had largely been destroyed.
Speaker 1: The wars in Southeast Asia from nineteen sixty five to
nineteen seventy five that involved about two point five million
American troops generated another crop of war brides, But although
the phenomenon is not entirely unknown, in Afghanistan and Iraq,
it is much less common. The difference is that Muslims
are extremely jealous of their women and segregate them as
much as possible. Hence, the US military, in the hope
of not further inflaming the occupied populations, has done its
best to discourage the troops from fraternizing with the local women.
Much more important than either of these forms of post
war migration is the kind which is driven by the
hope of a safer, more orderly, and more prosperous life abroad.
This describes the majority of modern migrations. Their destinations are
primarily the rich countries of the West, as well as Australia.
Migrants with a Christian background are normally absorbed without too
many problems, especially if they are white, as refugees from
the former Yugoslavia are. However, the Lebanese Christian diaspora has
shown that even those from Arab backgrounds can adapt to
the West. Hindus and Buddhists also tend to do well.
Speaker 2: Yeah, just for a completely unofficial point of reference, I
have never met people were quite as racist as Arab
Christians who moved to the West.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, I know, a couple.
Speaker 2: Off white nationalism or off supremacy.
Speaker 1: By contrasts, most Muslim migrants are fanatically opposed to any
kind of cultural assimilation. Using their mosques as community centers
and accepting religious imams as imams as their leaders, they
actively resist any attempt to integrate them. Some even begin
proselytizing for their way of life, as they have every
right to do in a democratic country. I love that sentence.
Speaker 2: He is is sometimes polite with how he says offensive things,
but he is blunt.
Speaker 1: Their objective is to spread their views on what the
late Samuel Huntingson used to call identity. Identity, as Huntington describes,
it includes the relations between God and man, the individual
and the group, the citizen and the state, parents and children,
husband and wife, as well as differing views of the
relative importance of rights and responsibilities, liberty and authority, equality
and hierarchy.
Speaker 2: The simple fact that he cites Huntington says a lot
about his intellectual position.
Speaker 1: It also includes general relations between sexes, as well as
the rights of homosexuals, as well as many of the
rights many Westerners hold deer in both their private lives
and in the socio political arena. As of twenty fifteen,
Muslims form about eight percent of the population of the
European Union. I wonder what that is now.
Speaker 2: That is also why the unofficial reason why basically everybody
opposed Turkey's admission into the European Union because Turkey would
immediately become the most populous state in the European Union.
So it would be a huge shift in balance in
terms of Muslims there. I will say that keep in mind,
because citizenship laws are so much different in Western Europe,
that eight percent probably does not reflect huge numbers of
long term migrants, to include people who are you know,
their third generation in a country who are not citizens
of their respective countries.
Speaker 1: In large cities, especially wealthy ones situated on important communication
lines or featuring seaports, the percentage of Muslims tends to
be much higher. In some cities, entire neighborhoods have been
taken over and reshaped in accordance with the migrants' preferences.
These neighborhoods, such as Tower Hamlets in East London and
the Kurrighaan District in Russels, have assumed a decidedly Mohammedan character,
complete with mosques, veiled women and muse moisens moisens calling
the faithful to prayer. Most of those neighborhoods are slums
where the inhabitants tend to be unskilled, under educated, and unemployed.
Many of their residents cannot even speak the language of
their hosts. Further complicating the situation, the newcomers lose their
accustomed control over wives and children, who tend to be
more amenable to integration. This ongoing intra family conflict not
infrequently least to domestic violence. Muslim immigrants often feel underprivileged
and discriminated against, even though they are living off the largesse.
One might even say the tribute of the people whose
lands they occupy or are occupying.
Speaker 2: I was going to take a moment to point out
that the issue with language, not only do they do
a poor job of adopting the language of their host country,
the fact they're cut off from the education system in
their original country of wars. Large number of their children
don't grow up speaking you know, proper Arabic or do
or whatever. So you get a lot of people who
speak the equivalent of I don't know what's the best
way to say ebonics, except they're not obviously black. They're
speaking a non language that's of such a poor qualility
that it's like they're not educated in anything.
Speaker 1: What's interesting here is when he talks about the losing
losing control to becoming a custom and becoming integrated, that's
exactly what happens to the Jews when they were in
countries that liberalized. They were able to come out from
under the uh under the power of their rabbis, and
they basically that they would then petition for their own
rights to get away from the rabbis.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and as a secular person who's ethnically Jewish, who
you know, he would probably say that explicitly.
Speaker 1: But what was this? One? Further complicated the situation. The
newcomers lose to our custom control over wives and children,
and it's send to be more amenable to integration. This
ongoing intra family conflict not in frequently, at least domestic violence.
Muslim immigrants often feel underprivileged and discriminated against, even though
they are living off thell or just one might even
say tribua the Liba. I already read that. Sorry. It
is true that only a small percentage of the immigrants
in question turn to violence, let alone politically motivated violence.
But it is also true that in all the countries
to which they have immigrated, Muslim immigrants are committing crimes
that a rate that far exceeds the native population. A
portion of this crime represents a continuation of politics that
is indistinguishable from terrorism and will inevitably lead to harsh
countermeasures and eventually reprisals.
Speaker 2: Again, migration is war.
Speaker 1: The present situation is more than a little reminiscent of
past migration inspired wars and modes ill for the future.
It is estimated that as many as five million of
France's Muslim already live in zone zones urbans, sensibly where
the French police and government have relatively little control, what
we call no go zones. The modern form of economic
migration is not caused by war, but it is threatening
to turn into a cause of war, and as has
happened many times before, an informative example of how minority
majority conflict can lead to violence can be seen in
the sixteenth century France. For thirty years following John Calvin's
break from the Roman Church in fifteen thirty, Catholics and
Hugonots looked at each other with increasing mistrust. This mistrust
occasionally sparks sporadic violence, and over time the violence gradually escalated.
In fifteen sixty two, with the Hugenots outnumbering with the
Eugonots numbering twelve point five percent of the French population,
full scale war finally broke out. The religious issues were
intertwined with political differences in foreign powers such as England, Spain,
and the England. The Low countries, various German princes and
even the papacy were drawn into the battle. By the
time Henry the Fourth was finally able to put an
end to the Eight Wars of Religion in fifteen ninety
eight by issuing the Edict of Nantis, more Frenchmen had
been killed than in any other conflict prior to World
War I, including the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars. Conclusions,
war is far from the only cause of migration. Other reasons,
primarily economic, have always played an important part in encouraging
people to leave their native lens, as the examples of
the Puritans and the Hugonots show. Religious motives can also
be a factor. Yet, even when these other reasons were
the cause, war and migration have been closely linked in
various and complex ways. At some times, war and migration
were essentially the same, as in the Great Migration of
peoples during the first few centuries after Christ, the Arab
expansion after six thirty two a d. The Maggiar invasion
of Europe, the Mongol invasions of China, and the movements
of many African tribes from one part of the continent
to another. At other times, the relationships between the two
phenomena were more complicated, such as ethnic cleansings that rendered
war unnecessary or took place after war's end, massive avoidance
of conscription, or soldiers bringing home concubines and war brides.
All these various forms have often intermingled, All appear regularly
in the annals of human history, and all will doubtless
will doubtless continue to do so in the future. The
only thing that changes in their relative importance at any
Their only thing that changes is their relative importance at
any given point in time. As far as the West
is concerned, the most significant migration today is the massive
influx of Muslims. The reason is that, unlike the people
of the secularized West, Muslims take their religion and the
way of life it prescribes seriously. As a consequence, they
are much harder to integrate than they're more malleable immigrants understand.
Speaker 2: This is basically the only reason anybody in the establishment
in the West is concerned about this issue. It's also
a large part of why, you know, parts of the
interior of America, like the South, especially why the establishment
hates us. It is because we're people who still believe
in religion and still live it as opposed to just
treating as a window dressing that means nothing.
Speaker 1: For the present. It would be going too far to
say that the refuge It would be going too far
to say that the refugees, as well as those who
are responsible for their plight back in their homelands, are
actively waging war against the West. They lack the leadership
and organization required for the effective, large scale violence that
war entails. However, it must be recognized that more than
a few in their midst are not averse to using
violence in order to achieve their aims. They have, after all,
invaded numerous countries without regard for the will of the
people of those countries, and their presence is no less
likely to spark resistance then armed invasions of the past.
Since war, as Klaus Wits Klaus klaus Witz teaches, has
a built in tendency to escalate, the resistance can be
expected to graduate into all out armed conflicts over time,
especially as seems likely if the influx continues and all
the valiant efforts at integration proved feudal From Berlin's Jerusalem,
let those with ears to listen listen and that's it.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the.
Speaker 1: What was I going to say there? The if we
see this now? Yeah, there there are reports coming out
of Springfield that Haitians are just walking into gun stores
and they're selling them guns.
Speaker 2: Mm hmm. Well again, I mean part of the problem
is if you were not to sell them, you know,
one report to the ATF, and you're probably gonna lose
your life because the sin. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Well, I mean FFL officially, anybody who holds an FFL
is allowed to refuse sale to anyone for any reason. Yeah,
that is officially officially.
Speaker 2: But if that reason is racism, you know, suddenly all
of your justifications go out. That's the magic word that
ends up their magic word. That is the state of
exception in contemporary society.
Speaker 1: And also he mentions that they have no leadership to
expect them to to wage war. They have no leadership
they have well, I mean it almost seems like they
do now. I mean, if they're being flown in here, yeah,
and given basically given places to live and given vehicles,
and they're allowed to buy they one may not say
that some of that power is colluding with them to
commit violence, but one could say that power is definitely
creating the opportunity and then looking the other way, and
not only looking the other way, but would do anything
to if somebody were to get jammed up by the law,
to make sure that they walk away.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and leadership doesn't have to always be internal. It
can be external, It can even be hidden. As much
as I generally think most conspiracy theories are bullshit, that
doesn't mean that people don't conspire and that some of
these actions don't achieve some level of scale. So Yeah,
whether or not it's explicit, I think a lot of
it is in a thousand or probably a billion, you know,
little nudges along the way to produce a result, which
functionally is the same thing. Again, migration is war, and
you know, very little in human nature has ever changed
and we continue to be human, which, again I think
progressivism is largely a rejection of the fundamentals of human nature.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, I appreciate, uh. I appreciate you bringing this
one up and bringing it to my attentions so that
we could get out here and read it, for joining me,
for commenting on it, and yeah, we'll do this again
real soon. I appreciate it, and hope you feel better,
all right, problem take care man. Thank you, thank