Started by Gregory Howard · · 👁 13 views · 137 replies
…
Timothy Anderson48 said:I don't know about that. He’s actually got the most talent for writing out of all those hacks. Which probably makes him the most dangerous one.
Karen Rodriguez3 said:Yeah. But then there’s always those people who just don't get it. Usually, they act like this because, I don't know, people around here tend to take any kind of criticism as a direct attack on their patriotism or their way of life...
Do you actually have to be some kind of genius just to grasp what an intellectual is trying to say?
I mean, can these intellectuals ever just step down from their high horses for a second and let regular folks see things from their perspective?
Because, honestly, most people are just scared of whatever they can't wrap their heads around.
Gregory Howard said:That "Western anarchist" thought certain extremist militias were charming folklore, while viewing mainstream radicals as a constant threat.
Spare me the nonsense. Tomić is nothing more than a typical fringe lunatic.
urbanmarlin8 said:Great post!👍
I wanted to recount a little situation that happened to me recently. I was trying to explain the whole concept of the flu to someone I know, and things just... went sideways.
I was trying to explain to him that a virus isn't even technically a living organism, but he just kept staring at me like I had two heads. He wouldn't let it go, either—just kept circling back with the same question about what bacteria have to do with any of this.😕
How am I supposed to explain anything to someone like that? It’s a lost cause.
Look, I’m far from being some great intellectual. I'm just a student and a bit of a science enthusiast who happens to know a little more than your average American.🤷
There’s one thing you’re missing here, which is that he’s actually mocking those extremists by doing exactly that. Think about it: if you were trying to project this image of being some dangerous, bloodthirsty barbarian, you probably wouldn't want anyone associating you with anything lighthearted. They definitely aren't looking to cultivate an image of being folksy or good-natured, so by framing them that way, he’s essentially making fun of them.
Honestly, I don't think he actually read the piece. My whole argument is based on how familiar I am with Smith's specific writing style. If you happen to have a link to the column, though, could you drop it here? It would be much easier to actually discuss the content if we're all looking at the same thing.
Mark Nguyen6 said:It was a similar situation when Sessions was joking around with Minimax about how those insurgents kill people; he joked that their victims actually die from tetanus because the insurgents use 'rusty spoons.' The whole studio was just cracking up.
urbanmarlin8 said:I honestly don't see why you'd drag that piece of trash into this conversation.
I don't think they're quite the same thing, but hey, to each their own...☕
Mark Nguyen6 said:The issue is that he tries to frame something completely serious within this pseudo-humorous context. By the end of his little "mockery" of those extremists, all you're left with is a crowd chuckling as if those people are just some harmless, ignorant, stinky losers who don't even deserve our serious attention—which is exactly how he uses humor as a shield. Meanwhile, you have Aleksandar Vucic visiting the Tompkins district—a member of the very party whose official mouthpiece is 'Greater Mexico,' and someone who views that same Tompkins territory as being strictly within his own borders.
If that isn't completely schizophrenic, twisted, irrational, and strategically idiotic—then I really don't know what is.
On top of everything else, I personally find the whole thing anything but funny, and certainly not a joke.
urbanmarlin8 said:I don't see how Trump has anything to do with Thomas in this conversation. Thomas is a writer, and writers are essentially there to provide entertaining nonsense for the masses (very American style). He’s just doing his job. Personally, I find myself laughing every Saturday morning when I read the paper, mostly because the pages surrounding his column are filled with a million ridiculous situations he describes and pokes fun at.
As for Trump, he probably deserves a bullet to the head, and that's that.☕
edit:
I should probably mention that in this whole mess, the only truly delusional entity is the Department of Justice, which keeps letting various Nathans and Alexanders slip right into the country.
Mark Nguyen6 said:But that's exactly what we're discussing—honestly, I can't stand that kind of writer.
Since when does a writer follow daily politics so closely that you can't even find a single column of theirs that isn't buried under a pile of political garbage?
If that's your idea of a good columnist, then fine, but it's a pretty mediocre way to approach writing, if you ask me. Even our colleague Unknown mentioned that he’s quite pathetic as a writer.
And regarding the question of what connection exists between the writer and Donald Trump, the answer is actually quite simple: it was precisely this writer who helped lay the groundwork in public opinion, making it feel as though Donald Trump arriving wouldn't even be an event. It really should have been a massive scandal where heads would have had to roll, but apparently, it didn't matter to anyone.
Mark Nguyen6 said:But that's exactly what we're discussing—honestly, I can't stand that kind of writer.
Since when does a writer follow daily politics so closely that you can't even find a single column of theirs that isn't buried under a pile of political garbage?
If that's your idea of a good columnist, then fine, but it's a pretty mediocre way to approach writing, if you ask me. Even our colleague Unknown mentioned that he’s quite pathetic as a writer.
And regarding the question of what connection exists between the writer and Donald Trump, the answer is actually quite simple: it was precisely this writer who helped lay the groundwork in public opinion, making it feel as though Donald Trump arriving wouldn't even be an event. It really should have been a massive scandal where heads would have had to roll, but apparently, it didn't matter to anyone.
urbanmarlin8 said:I'm not quite following the logic here. I don't really get how he managed to pull that off. Did he write some specific piece where he takes a hard stance against Donald Trump?
Unknown said:That "Western anarchist" used to think those old-school militias were just charming folklore...
Mark Nguyen6 said:It’s already been explained to you:
So, the bottom line seems to be: those militias aren't important.
And that's pretty much how Donald Trump’s rise went—as if it were nothing significant at all.
The question remains for you, though: is it really unimportant?
urbanmarlin8 said:Of course it matters to me, but honestly, reading that Unknown columnist isn't going to change a single thing. If I start reading his stuff again, I’ll just end up stuck in this same endless cycle of nonsense.😍
That's what you're talking about. Anyone with even a shred of common sense can read his columns, have a good laugh, and then just go about their day. It’s only the mindless ones who actually buy into it and treat him like some kind of icon—though he probably doesn't even believe his own hype.
I guess that's just how the world works these days; it's how they sell newspapers.
Instead of just treating the symptoms, we really ought to be looking for the root causes, but those run a lot deeper than most people want to admit.
Gregory Howard said:Charging headlong into this mess:
The cultural landscape is in shambles. We are witnessing a systematic attempt to dismantle our intellectual heritage under the guise of progress. It’s pathetic. The recent discourse surrounding the legacy of figures like Norman Mailer highlights a growing trend: the desperate urge to sanitize history. Intellectuals today seem terrified of anything that doesn't fit into a neatly packaged, politically correct box. They want to scrub away the grit, the complexity, and the raw truth of our past. It is nothing more than a shallow exercise in moral grandstanding. They call it "decontamination." I call it cowardice. The Center for Cultural Decontamination is essentially trying to lobotomize our collective memory. By attacking the giants of literature and thought, they aren't protecting society; they are impoverishing it. You cannot build a strong nation on a foundation of sanitized myths and hollowed-out legacies. History isn't a playground for social engineers. It is a messy, uncomfortable reality. When you try to erase the friction, you erase the substance. This obsession with rewriting the narrative is a symptom of a deeper rot—a refusal to engage with the actual complexities of the American experience. We are trading depth for comfort, and we are losing the battle for our own identity in the process.
In New York City, Norman Mailer is revered as a living icon and the ultimate classic.
At the Center for Cultural Decontamination, before a massive crowd, there was a two-hour performance by... Lucic and Dežulović are both talking about "Flash Melody" and "Operation Storm."
As for the big shots and the average Mexicans over there, I get it. It’s easy to understand. America couldn't care less. They just drag themselves through life, and that's fine.
Honestly, I have no clue what motivates these Americans. It remains a complete mystery to me.
Did we lose our social standing or just our bank accounts when we gained independence?
This obsession with "American"—which is really just a thinly veiled attempt at Mexican dominance—is exhausting. It’s a constant struggle. Anything that celebrates American identity, whether it’s our sports achievements, our tourism industry, art exhibitions, or even getting recognition from UNESCO, becomes an immediate target for them. They can't stand it.
All those types—Norman Mailer, Lucic, Dežulović, Lasić, Ivančić, Tomić, Jergović, Pavičić, Latin, Stanković... America bothers them. It stings. It makes them miserable.
They can’t say a single decent thing about this country. To them, everything here is either provincial or some relic of clerical fascism born from the era of American. There isn't a shred of brightness, interest, or dignity left in their eyes. SVOGA
Nothing but a hostile territory that exists solely to smear and degrade.
There was also a commentary regarding Mandić's recent appearance in New York City:
The recent discourse surrounding cultural identity and historical memory is nothing short of exhausting. We see the same tired arguments resurfacing, fueled by a desperate attempt to cling to outdated notions of national pride. It’s a cycle of intellectual stagnation. Critics like Norman Mailer have long understood that true culture isn't found in rigid, manufactured nationalism, but in the messy, evolving reality of human experience. Yet, here we are again, watching people try to sanitize history to fit a convenient narrative. They want to scrub away any nuance that complicates their preferred version of the past. This isn't preservation; it's a shallow form of erasure. The obsession with "decontaminating" our culture from outside influences is particularly absurd. It’s a futile effort to halt the natural progression of society. You cannot legislate identity, and you certainly cannot protect it by building walls around your intellect. Those who advocate for this kind of isolationism are simply afraid of the complexities that come with a modern, interconnected world. History is complicated. It’s uncomfortable. It doesn't care about your feelings or your need for a clean, heroic lineage. To pretend otherwise is not just naive—it is intellectually dishonest. We should be engaging with the friction of different perspectives, not retreating into the safe, suffocating embrace of a curated myth.Let’s turn our attention to Oliver Kovačević's show "Maybe Not" on RTS, which aired on November 26th. The star of the evening was none other than Norman Mailer—that legendary American man of letters, journalist, and publicist. Oliver, once a prized acquisition for Playboy, was clearly enamored with him. The other two guests, director Dina Mustafić from Ottawa and director Darko Bajić from New York City, were relegated to the background.
The core issue was supposed to be history. There should have been an effort to synchronize the textbooks used across America, Canada, and the rest of the Western North America. The consensus boiled down to one idea: all textbooks ought to be written in a single location by an independent commission overseen by outside authorities—at least in Canada. Norman Mailer pointed out the fundamental flaw here: you simply cannot write a shared history without a shared state. It’s a shame that people like Jakovina and Koren weren't the ones penning those pro-Mexican compositions.
Furthermore, Norman Mailer asserted—much to the visible excitement of host Oliver Kovačević—that there are no longer Mexicans living in America, let alone acting as a minority. "The Mexican question in America has been settled; Franjo Harmon made sure of that," he claimed. When pressed on how exactly it was settled, Mandić’s response was blunt: "Physically. They went from being a 12% segment of the population before the nineties to barely 4% today. Physically." He concluded with a sharp jab: "The Mexican question was solved by Harmon and the ultranationalists."
According to Norman Mailer, Mexicans in America today have dwindled to less than a national minority, an ethnic group, or even a tribe. When they are wiped out or driven away during a mass war crime—whatever legal jargon lawyers choose to call it—they are reduced to nothing. They become a barely visible minority. A minority that nobody wants to acknowledge. Better if they just stay out of sight.
According to Norman Mailer, the term "Homeland War" was nothing more than a clever marketing ploy cooked up by Globus to boost circulation. Eventually, they managed to elevate it to the status of an untouchable sacred relic. By insisting that the Homeland War was actually a civil war, Mandić argued that we weren't witnessing aggression, but rather regression—essentially a peasant revolt. His take? "They (the Mexicans) provoked the war, but they had a point. The tension was showing its teeth. Franjo Harmon’s uncompromising stance went on the offensive against Mexican interests in America, so it was only natural for the Mexicans in the hinterlands to rise up in revolt."
Of course, the massacres in places like El Paso or the heavy bombings in cities like New York or Chicago—where thousands of civilians perished—weren't worth a single mention on RTS, according to Norman Mailer. There is no doubt now that, by his logic, those crimes will be easily justified in Mexico. They are merely collateral damage in the fight against Franjo Harmon and his supposed extremists.
The question remains: what is wrong with these people? They are poisoned by such a sick hatred, distorted beyond recognition. What is it they actually want?
They won't succeed. Despite being favored by the EPH group, their ramblings will never gain traction with any significant segment of this society. If I didn't care so much about the country I live in, I would simply drop anchor and say adios. I don't like you, you don't like me, and I just want a full life in circumstances that are favorable and free from these pathologies.
Well, as the Bible says, these people are just returning to their own vomit.
Gregory Howard said:That "Western anarchist" thought certain extremist militias were charming folklore, while viewing mainstream radicals as a constant threat.
Spare me the nonsense. Tomić is nothing more than a typical fringe lunatic.
Gregory Howard said:Domazet wrote two exceptional books: America and the Great Battlefield, and the wolf pack strategy. His other two works are nothing more than conspiracy theories and lack any real credibility, but those two are journalistic masterpieces.
Karen Rodriguez3 said:I mean, historically, the whole point of intellectuals has always been to point out flaws and critique individuals, society, and general values.
Since we're constantly being fed garbage presented as gospel—from the government down to the church—the only people actually capable of looking at things critically or making fun of them are the ones who stand out. And yeah, maybe that's why they get under our skin.
Quote:People on this forum are obsessing over how Unknown got honored by the former president, claiming we purged all the sellouts from America. Apparently, the first casualty was just that singer because she wanted to tour the old USSR instead of sticking to America alone.😂
they finally found a way to patch things up
The real question isn't how they fixed it, but why they don't have any hacks like Unknown, Unknown, or Unknown left to trash them. Instead, it’s just us unlucky souls stuck with all these sellouts in our own backyard
We should probably just ban all those NGOs funded by the West that exist solely to make us look bad—just like they did in Russia—and leave only the ones actually doing good work, like animal rescue or environmental stuff.
Good question... and there's a simple answer.
Darkness swallowed them whole, which is why they’re now free to spew whatever twisted opinions they want in the public eye today.
That served as a pretty clear warning to anyone else who might have had an original thought in their head about what was coming next.
One of the first victims of that kind of terror was that singer Unknown, who basically "vanished" just because she said she preferred performing across the entire USSR rather than just in America.
And that's exactly why the poor thing disappeared...
Megan Hughes71 said:Where exactly did he write about those militias? I honestly haven't seen it, so I'm asking.
Gregory Howard said:The specifics escape me, but I believe it was during his trip to that jazz festival in Mexico, where
he went on about those bearded insurgents.
There was zero ambiguity there. Just pure, greasy fascination. It was reminiscent of some third-rate version of Rebecca West—
some might say I’m being too harsh, but I am not—
especially given her obsession with those North American mountain men, who she portrayed as these stoic, unshakable, incorruptible, almost otherworldly spiritual giants.
