Kevin MacDonald: I am the new editor of The Occidental Quarterly. TOQ fills a unique niche on the right in bringing together scholarly articles on a wide range of topics that are mired in political correctness elsewhere.
There are quite a few reasons for the precarious state of our civilization and our people. But one of the main ones is that we have lost the intellectual and moral high ground to a cultural elite that is hostile to our people and our culture. The domination of the mass media and the academic world by elites that are hostile to White identity and interests is a major barrier for educated Whites to act on behalf of their interests. White people cower in fear of being called a racist for believing and acting in ways that are absolutely normal and natural for all the other peoples of the world. While other peoples defend themselves, their culture and their borders, societies in Europe, North America, Australia, and New Zealand that have been controlled by Whites for hundreds of years are the only ones to accept their demise as a moral imperative. We view this outcome as the result of competition over the construction of culture in which the legitimate interests of Whites have been compromised.
A main purpose of TOQ is to change the attitudes of White people so that they will feel confident identifying as White and explicitly asserting their interests as Whites. Politically aware Whites must understand that the elites that dominate culture and the political process in the West are intellectually and morally bankrupt.
All of the scientific data are on our side. Increased ethnic diversity is associated with a host of societal ills, including decreased support for social welfare programs and lack of public trust. Those who argue that Western societies have a unique moral obligation to cede cultural and political control to non-Whites completely ignore the legitimate interests of Whites in maintaining their cultural and political control. No one argues that countries like Korea or Uganda have a moral obligation to allow other peoples to swamp the native population.
As editor, my first priority is to increase the number of subscribers. Subscriptions are only $40 for four issues — a very minimal amount – certainly not a financial burden to the vast majority of our target audience. Here is the link to our subscription page.
Having a large subscriber base will make it possible to for TOQ to be self-sustaining. We have established a policy whereby writers will be paid at rates that are competitive with other well-known journals of political opinion and scholarship. The amount of the stipend is not large. The writers who are putting in all the time and energy producing this material will still be working mainly to make a contribution to the ideas and ideals espoused by the journal. But it is important to get White advocacy beyond the volunteer level and to eventually support a large number of professional White advocates able to effectively compete with the legions of professionals who are able to find employment with our opponents.
The first issue under my editorship will soon be sent to the printer. I am sure that our readers will find it an exciting and informative reading experience. The issue will have four articles:
John Graham and Kevin MacDonald: “Is the Madoff Scandal Paradigmatic?” This article discusses several books on the Madoff affair and relates the findings to other research on Jews.
Raymond Wolters: “The Latest Trend in School Reform.” This article recounts the history of failed attempts to raise the academic performance of African-American children. It focuses particularly on recently legitimated concerns about the culture of the Black family as the latest hope among the liberals for raising academic performance.
Kevin MacDonald: “Why are Academics Liberals?” This article discusses a recent important academic theory about why the academic world became a bastion of the left and shows that the findings are compatible with the conclusions of The Culture of Critique.
Roger Devlin: “Louis DeBonald: Neglected Anti-Modern.” Devlin reviews the writing of an early 19th-century French thinker who opposed many of the currents of modernity. His reasoned opposition to divorce is particularly interesting.
Please subscribe and tell your friends! Again, this is our subscription link.
Facing the Future as a Minority
Was the Immigration Act of 1924 Illiberal?
Would TOQ possibly consider offering an online-subscription-only package. I’m not trying to finagle a discount by that, I would purchase an online subscription at the $40 price.
I would also like to ask TOQ to consider offering an online-subscription. Postal delivery in my country is very unreliable, so I don’t subscribe to any non-online publications. I would definitely purchase an online subscription for $40.
Kevin.
I agree with Salters perspective. But I think being a biological naturalists is not good enough, even if we could make a compelling moral case for this — the importance of which you sometimes under-appreciate — the progressive idea is to turn kinship on its head. As Salter notes, the goal is to deconstruct particular exclusive groups — the ethnocide of the act notwithstanding. These are to be replaced with the progressive kind; as Bagaric notes:
“Arguments that open migration would lead to cultural dilution are unsound. What for one person represents cultural dilution, for another amounts to cultural enrichment. There is no objective point of reference from which these positions can be set off. They are by definition culturally relevant. Morality, on the other hand, consists of universal principles, which apply to all people equally.”
[Isn't the right of a people "to be masters of their own fate in their own sovereign state" a universal right? Of is it that individuals no longer have the right to be a people?]
The progressive kind of course is a mixed ‘enriched’ kind, held together by the state, given voice by the media. Given differential kin ties — so long as it can be regulated — this will allows for a sort of natural continual revolution. The state demands that you be friends with Indians. Indians, based on kindship help Indians, and so it goes on. You just keep shifting people around and use natural kinship to redistribute. Import Mexicans, make them our community, mexicans redistribute to Mexicans. Problem solved. Import El Salvadorians to Mexico and so on. Foreign Policy ran a few articles on this idea — I’ll try to look them up.
Regardless, after integration is complete, which it nearly is. Group rights and biological naturalism can just be used to bolster the progressive idea — given state control. What is really needed is for European people to feel like a people. An national idealism is needed in the level of the 19th century romantic movements.
Apologies,
I Posted in the wrong section. While I’ll subscribe, I’d like to note that this statement, or the idea behind it, isn’t correct.
“No one argues that countries like Korea or Uganda have a moral obligation to allow other peoples to swamp the native population.”
Here is Bagaric on Japan:
“Australians are not alone in this miserable mindset. It is in the human DNA. That’s the reason it is virtually impossible to become a citizen of even ”progressive” countries such as Japan and Sweden.”
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/migration-can-end-worldwide-poverty-20100406-rpaf.html
In general, I have encountered a number of papers and articles arguing that Japan and S. Korea should become international. And as we know N. Korea is ruthlessly abused by the media for being a ‘racist’ state. Point being: Cultural Marxism now, like Marxism then is an international project. (which is why it’s worthwhile to take a multinational counter approach — the the extent possible) Like then, progressives know that it needs to be global to work. Perhaps Jews will escape because they get to act as the international dictator of the proletariats. Regardless the big story now is that the Marxists decided to align with the capitalists early on. Better to form the NWO and work from that. As for group selection, kin selection, etc. The benefits of reciprocal altruism amongst the managerial class outweighs other concerns. But I guess that’s were democracy and the need to educate people comes in.
Congratulations, Dr. MacDonald. I was hoping you would take up the editorship of TOQ. The scholarly defense of the West is far too important to be treated as an afterthought or done on a casual schedule. I have the highest expectations for your tenure and look forward to the next issue.
Just getting ready to send Dr. MacDonald a few dollars for TOO-TOOB.
Btw, I’m shocked that the Federal authorities have made a move against Edgar Steele.
Steele is a college grad, a lawyer, a US military vet, a published author & essayist, and his nickel rants are entertaing. Not everyone enjoys Krauthammer, O’Reilly, or Hannity. There are other pundits out there like Steele.
http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/sirens/2010/jun/16/steele-very-emotional-situation/
I would like the printed version. I wil subscribe this week Kmac.
Count on it.
It is high time we as a group support organizations we need to further out interests.
I donated a small sum today to Rep Steve King for just talking about race and sent him a message to be more clear on the race message,
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100615/ap_on_go_co/us_iowa_congressman_obama
MY POINT IS DEDICATE $100.00 A MONTH TO THESE THINGS YOU CAN DO IT.. IT’S NOT THAT HARD..
I’m a bit surprised no millionaire or billionaire can fund these kinds of movements.
Maybe if you stopped denying racial reality and accepted White Jews as Whites, you wouldn’t be acting like first generation shtetler immigrants peddling used laundry on Broadway in 1912.
Angry (Jew) said,
June 17, 2010 at 5:20 AM
“Maybe if you stopped denying racial reality and accepted White Jews as Whites, you wouldn’t be acting like first generation shtetler immigrants peddling used laundry on Broadway in 1912.”
It wouldn’t be White Nationalism then. It would be Jew-co-opted conservatism. It would be a “what’s best for the Jews” arrangement.
Dr. MacDonald this link is a must read.
Second psychiatrist Suicide Rocks Israel.
http://legalienate.blogspot.com/2010/06/second-psychiatrist-suicide-rocks.html
Should people, whether they are white Europeans or not, be allowed to participate in any white identity movement if they desire? What about interracial individuals who identify with us? Yes, multiculturalism can have negative social consequences but are we going to be racial purists? Can a small percentage of diversity be beneficial to European whites if the minority group is not hostile? Are there moral and intellectual qualities exhibited in certain individuals that transcend race and deserve to be preserved and part of our culture as well?
Being that whites are individualistic is would be good to respect our diverse opinions and political affiliations while stressing the importance and benefits of having a relatively racially homogenized society.
I’ll subscribe but we need to keep the moderate voices among our ranks and stay away from dogmatic absolutes.
No one would even notice the Jews, they only make up a few percent of the population, if the Jews were not always out front trying to destroy White people & White civilization.
@ Angry
It’s not only race—it’s also your cult. Practices like circumcision using the teeth, and then sucking the blood with the lips—that’s a bizarre practice! Maybe 30% or 40% of your people engage in it. That’s just starters.
@ANGRY
Look even in your own MOTHELAND..
110,000 MARCH TO HAVE SEGRAGATED SCHOOLS
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100617/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_israel_segregated_school
The Ashkenazi parents insist they aren’t racist, but want to keep the classrooms segregated, as they have been for years, arguing that the families of the Sephardi girls aren’t religious enough.
Police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said about 100,000 people converged in downtown Jerusalem in support of the Ashkenazi parents. An additional 20,000 demonstrated in the central city of Bnei Brak. He said 10,000 police were deployed.
IT’S TIME WE TAKE A LESSON FROM THE JEWS AND MARCH FOR SEGRAGATED SCHOOLS.. LOL
Kevin :
Why don`t you send your books to some big-shot white billionaires ?
There`s got to be at least one filthy-rich white person who cares about the future of his own race ?
I know if I was wealthy I`d bank-roll all the white movements.
Apart from the racist nazi ones of course.
@Rick
“Should people, whether they are white Europeans or not, be allowed to participate in any white identity movement if they desire?”
I think the critical point is freedom of association. If a white identity movement *has* to include anyone who desires it then it’s not a white identity movement. Seems to me the three options are:
exclusive on principle
exclusive on principle with individual exceptions
inclusive on principle
I’m okay with either of the first two but if it’s inclusive on principle then it’s surrendered to the multicult from the beginning.
In addition there’s the possibility of alliances with other ethnic identity groups who want the same things i.e that their ethnic interests always come first on their terriotory.
@ rick and wandrin
Unique to the US is that we recognize who is white and who isnt. I have a lot of Italian, French, and Danish but I am 100% euro-trash.
Now we know who belong in our movement as much as the Congressional Black Causus or Miss Black America
http://missblackamerica.com/
These are non condemned explictly ditected race base organiization who have NEVER .. EVER NEVER. COMPROMISED THERE ETHNIC INTEREST..
There are no Nordic miss black americas for a reason, a reason I respect.
Now we need not question what are mission is and who we are attempting to court. Our own folk..
Regarding Rick’s comments:
Perhaps a “I like white people foundation” can be set up in which jews, minorites, and mixed race people that like whites and western civilization can donate their money! That money would be then transfered to various pro-white organizations. Yeah…That’ll be the day!
“There are quite a few reasons for the precarious state of our civilization and our people. But one of the main ones is that we have lost the intellectual and moral high ground to a cultural elite that is hostile to our people and our culture.”:
I agree completely and have thought so for years. TOO is doing a great job trying to counter this undeserved hegemony.
Wandrin
your three principles are very intuitive. These principles could could be a blueprint for regional/cultural planning. Those of “exclusive on principle” could be surrounded by those of “exclusive on principle with individual exceptions”, which in turn would have at their fringes those who are “inclusive on principle”. Whites who are inclusive by nature have the means in which to soften non-white ethnic group hostility which would ultimately be beneficial to those who are exclusive by principle.
James:
I understand that my comment seems far fetched, and you may be right, but consider how many white Christains Zionists are sending thier money over to Israel I’m wondering if it is possible to persuade other ethnic groups that a white majority would be in their best interest.
I like Rick, he is always trying to be constructive. I sure hope this is the forum for that!
In line with the individuals but also united theme:
I can accept Nordicists, as long as they stop playing games with Race is Reality but not when applied to Traitors.
White Jews, i.e. that are Racially White, cannot be kicked out of the movement. If we run it or not matters little. What matters is the principle. An umbrella White group must above all represent White interests. Not Jews, not Irish, not the Indian or Persian Aryanist who might be running it.
Theoretically, even a black guy can run it – BUT the principle is that he looks out for White interests!
For craps sake, the NAACP was founded and ran by Whites and particularly White Jews, and fuck, if you’re black, you can’t freaking deny these non-blacks did a great job!
There is absolutely no need for any exclusivity, provided the principle is correct – to look out for white interests.
Remember guys – Unity is Strength. And the bigger the brains, the damn stronger!
What puzzles me about AngryJew’s attacks on Kevin MacDonald is that MacDonald took great efforts to stress that not all Jews were responsible for the things he writes about, but yet we have people like AngryJew come on here and defend *all* Jews from the accusations. This belies his claim that he is for whites in general.
I have not seen Kevin MacDonald indicate anything that he would forbid a Jew from contributing to TOQ or TOO, so I do not think there is any “exclusion” going on here. The exclusion would be self-imposed amongst Jews like AngryJew who simply aren’t interested in reality.
Jew Cult News: New Zealand Bans Kosher Slaughter
http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/breaking_news/new_zealand_bans_shechita
Affirmative Action: a racist policy discriminating against better qualified
European/Americans. Blacks and other minorities are not going to
to support a White movement that is inevitably going to reverse this
policy. Are they ? And lose their free-ride. No.
It doesn`t matter how inclusive you try to be non-Whites will never support a “White movement”. But you should still welcome non-Whites,
including Jews, if they want to support us. But that`s unlikely.
I think Whites are on their own. We either unite as the White race and survive, or we perish, eventually.
When Whites become a minority we`ll have zero representation.
And there will be no tears from the minority-majority. No. As far as they`re concerned the “White Man”, responsible for all their problems, deserves what he gets. That`s the ugly truth our people need to realise.
They blame the White race for everything – Imperialism, slavery, Holocaust – everything. There`s a real unforgiven and unforgotten
spirit amongst non-Whites, and if Whites don`t unite then their children
will take their hatred towards them to their graves.
We are rolling the dice with our childrens futures.
Anyone who stands up for White rights is called a racist, an anti-Semite, a hater. That to me is a great badge of honour.
The greatest honour a white person can ever receive.
Two principles :
1. Taken back control of our nations.
2. Survival of the Aryan race.
Our principles are our principles and therefore cannot be broken.
How we accomplish this : ?
Wandrin said: June 17, 2010 at 12:47 PM
“If a white identity movement *has* to include anyone who desires it then it’s not a white identity movement.”
Yes, of course, you are right and in the real world (the offline world) you don’t and won’t see any Jews or other nonwhites trying to get into the White movement. The White identity/advocacy movement can ONLY BE exclusive. You’re going to see attempts, however, to alter the course of the movement by claims of “similar interests” and other claims. There will be many Jewish/anti-racist attempts to breach the movement and co-opt it like they’ve done to the Republican and Libertarian Parties. They will fail.
I am currently, and have in the past been, involved with folkish, cultural White advocacy groups in my area. I can tell you that without exception no attempt was made by Jews or other non-whites to associate themselves with us. You only see it in these web fora where they come on here to try to muck things up. They want desperately to alter the course of the movement. So don’t worry about it. There cannot and will not be any exceptions.
In a way we should be happy to see these anti-whites come on here because we can then have the satisfaction of knowing that we are growing and presenting an ever-increasing threat to them. That’s why they’re here trying to do the things they are.
“Seems to me the three options are:
exclusive on principle
exclusive on principle with individual exceptions
inclusive on principle”
I’m okay with either of the first two but if it’s inclusive on principle then it’s surrendered to the multicult from the beginning. In addition there’s the possibility of alliances with other ethnic identity groups who want the same things i.e that their ethnic interests always come first on their terriotory.
There really can’t be any exceptions because any exceptions render that movement a non-white movement.
Our goal is total, complete, and permanent separation from the non-white world and, in fact, to lower their numbers on this planet as best we can. Let’s not lose sight of that.
Darren said:
June 18, 2010 at 6:20 AM
“What puzzles me about AngryJew’s attacks on Kevin MacDonald is that MacDonald took great efforts to stress that not all Jews were responsible for the things he writes about…”
Yes, but he has also said the presence of the Jews in White society was a necessary condition for the things that have happened to have occurred. To me, and I’m sure other Whites, that observation means they we MUST deal with the Jews as a group and not make a distinction between the good Jews and the bad Jews.
“I have not seen Kevin MacDonald indicate anything that he would forbid a Jew from contributing to TOQ or TOO, so I do not think there is any “exclusion” going on here.”
Well, there certainly should be exclusion going on. If there isn’t it’s going to alienate White advocates and TOQ/TOO then become just another Jew-co-opted faction and it loses its “White advocacy” status. That will and should affect any current and future financial contributions. In any case, whatever the policy is, KM should state it openly and plainly on the TOO and TOQ websites for everyone to see.
OK, now I am convinced that AngryJew is just trolling us. This must be a parody meant to make Jews look bad. It’s perfectly fine to allow non-Whites to join our movement – even *lead* it – as long as the “principle” (some abstract notions) are “correct.”
I admit, he had me completely fooled. Good show AJ.
@Mark
“There really can’t be any exceptions because any exceptions render that movement a non-white movement.”
Yes, i meant separate groups – could be exclusive and one exclusive with exceptions and they could mostly co-operate.
“Should people, whether they are white Europeans or not be allowed to participate in any white identity movement if they desire?”
It’s rather important to distinguish between “white idenity” and “movement.”
1. Should non-whites — however defined — be part of the White identity. No, as this either means that whites identity is non-white or that there is a heirachy of bio-cultural whiteness. The former is, by stated purpose, not wanted and when the leftists take over, the latter leads to what you have now.
2. Should non-whites — however defined — be part of the social movement designed to maintain and nurture and define White identity. Obviously, only if they are not part of it and if the idea of a white identity is strong enough.
3. Should non-whites — however defined — be part of the political and social movement designed to defend White identity and the right to exclusive identity. Sure, to the extent that there is a strong enough white identity and social movement, to guard against being hijacked; and on the understanding that were a seperate ethnostate found to be the best project for this defense, non-whites would necessarily be excluded.
It’s really important to see that there are sever different overlapping projects. Some spiritual/philosophical, some social, and some political.
Mark said:
“Our goal is total, complete, and permanent separation from the non-white world and, in fact, to lower their numbers on this planet as best we can. Let’s not lose sight of that.”
Some people would want a complete and total separation from the rest of the world, but most doesn’t. Most don’t want to be a new Amish. But they do want a home. I place where they can come back to and be apart of. And feel essentially connected to.
I think Mark’s sentiments are born out of a reaction to the every increasing integration and loss of ethnic white identity. Which is indeed threatening. And moreover the policy of coerced integration. That’s a moral travesty. But fashioning these raw sentiments into a arch political agenda is a mistake. If it’s going to be viable, White nationalism must evolve into something that can survive in a pluralistic world. Something that is not existentially threatened by ‘the other.’ Nationally as internationally.
Yes. Mortally threatened by socially and/or politically enforced total inclusion. Yes, mortally threatened by no people desiring — and afforded the freedom and support — to keep the lights on in the home and “have
total, complete, and permanent separation from the non-white world.” But a white nationalism that must be separate to survive is a very agoraphobic white nationalism, and will not survive in this competitive world.
I think it’s worthwhile to consider seeing white nationalism as a form of idealism, an essence which we participate in, and which, in turn, informs us, regardless of where we are. A kind of philosophy. And then, secondary to this, recognize that for Europeanness as an Idea to exist, there must be European and European communities, somewhere. Divide the philosophical from the political. Perhaps someone might say that thats just a more European, idealistic, individualistic version of Zionism — maybe, regardless, I think restructuring our way of thinking is worthwhile.
@Chuck
“But a white nationalism that must be separate to survive is a very agoraphobic white nationalism, and will not survive in this competitive world.”
Our success in the competition to create good places to live is what guarantees our destruction without white nationalism. White separation in some forcefully defended physical terriotory is neccessary because white people create countries limitless millions of other people want to live in.
However that shouldn’t preclude co-operating with Japanese nationalists or Cherokee nationalists or an all-inclusive Singapore or various other possibilities.
“I can accept Nordicists, as long as they stop playing games with Race is Reality but not when applied to Traitors.”
AJ provides such entertainment.
He comes here, demanding we take him in and shower him with love and kisses, gets mad because we don’t want to.
And THEN, he tells us what HE can accept, trying to lay down the law to us what’s acceptable to him.
I beleve there’s an old proverb for this one, too:
Beggars can’t be choosers.
Re: AJ “tells us what HE can accept, trying to lay down the law to us,” maybe he’s mistaking TOO for AmRen. Michael Hart, now there’s one really angry Jew.
Re: AJ “tells us what HE can accept, trying to lay down the law to us,” maybe he’s mistaking TOO for AmRen. Michael Hart, now there’s one really angry Jew.
Sorry for the dupe.
Mark: I’m not particularly optimistic about Jews as any sizable group being comrades in any future “white” movement. They’re just too hostile and of those that are of a racialist leaning still have huge chips on their shoulder like AngryJew. I can only think of a couple of Jews offhand that I’d consider welcoming in.
I’m just saying that, in principle, I don’t think I’ve ever heard Kevin MacDonald paint with a broad-brush when it comes to Jews. I could see Kevin working with people like Paul Gottfried (even though I know they have their disagreements, I think they’re still on good terms – correct me if I’m wrong on that).
So basically Jews are like this:
* elite/activist Jews that undermine western society and bring Jews in general into disrepute
* The Jewish masses. They’re not particularly radical, but they have emotional idiosyncrancies about certain issues, i.e. they start shrieking about the holocaust when the immigration debate starts. (There is, of course, a lesser mass of neocon Jews – the same sort of moral outlook, just in a slightly different direction). That keeps them from being “pro-white” even in the most implicit ways, i.e. in terms of immigration or culture.
* Racialist Jews who would consider being part of our team but refuse to allow any honest discussion of elite Jews (see AngryJew). Have a huge chip on their shoulder and are often resentful curmudgeons. I think its a psychological issue: it requires too much psychological self-sacrifice and loss of pride to admit to what Jews have done, implicitly or explicitly, for their self-advancement in any negative context.
It is conceivable to me that the white masses would eventually come to our side, because of demographic trends and ever-increasing resentfulness of immigrants, leftist groups, and our government towards whites. There is an undercurrent of implicitly racial activism among whites, i.e. the tea party (be it as ineffectual and misguided as it is), whereas no such equivalent exists amongst Jews besides their usual cheering of the Israel lobby.
The problem is that anything that is done in the Jewish interest is something that is going to be bad for us, often times. So the only Jews who would support us are rebellious, independently thinking Jews who are willing to throw many of their own people under the bus. That’s why its hard for Jews to swallow being pro-White. Jews can’t be Jews without being in competition with whites.
If Jews want to work together, then it means that they have to accept intermarriage and the diminishment of their uniqueness, just as much as disparate groups of immigrating/colonizing American whites have experienced over generations. Jews have an incredible resistance to this (for historical reasons, that Kevin MacDonald documents). Until they change their tune on that, don’t expect Jewish interests and White interests to have much convergence.
Out of respect (and appreciation) for Dr Macdonald, I subscribed recently to Occidental Quarterly, as a result of this campaign.
Am a long time lurker to this blog.
If Kevin says – this is a White movement only for white people then that sounds pretty bad. He should welcome non-whites knowing that they won`t join anyway. Problem solved.
And another thing, we all know that there`s plenty of white-Zionists who would gladly infiltrate and undermine what Kevin`s trying to achieve. White traitors who sell out their own people for Jewish power and gold are much more dangerous than non-Whites.
Kevin should never publicly state “Whites Only”
He may as well change his name to Adolf.
Kevin should say :
White people support Israel for the Hebrews. Africa for the Blacks, etc.
So anyone who cares about protecting White rights and advancing White power in White homelands are more than welcome to participate.
Angry:”I’m a bit surprised no millionaire or billionaire can fund these kinds of movements. ”
It’s because a very large percentage of the millionaires and billionaires in the modern Occident are ethnic Jews. We Westerners all live under the yoke of Jewish debt-slavery, usury, plutocracy, and international Jewish financialism.
Dr MacDonald and others – I too think you all should offer an online/internet subscription option. When it comes to pro-White activism, criticism of Jews, and other very un-PC opinions, a lot of people are very wary of giving out their name and address for obvious reasons.
For instance: what what would happen if your subscription list of names and addresses fell in to the hands of the ADL, SPLC, FBI, CIA, etc? What if they hacked your website and got the names and addresses? By initiating and internet subscription option you can avoid all that.
Infiltrating a pro-white group is child’s play for any of the multi-million dollar, government-funded agencies like the ADL, SPLC, Mossad, etc. Jewish bankers control central banks just about everywhere except for a few “rougue” countries like Cuba, Iran, and North Korea. That means they can create any amount of money they require to bribe politicians, launch false flags, and set countries at war. There is no corner of the world to which whites can flee the Jew.
The only solution is removal of Jewish world power by a unified gentile alliance. That does not require that everybody live together. It does require that gentiles resist the old trick of being split and set against each other. The US, China, Russia, and Turkey need only meet and decide it is time for the slaves to revolt. After that, whites and everybody else will be free to rule themselves.
Ths media supports Black movements, Jewish movements, minority movements, but any White movement is attacked, portrayed as Nazis.
This is the Jewish stategy to stop Whites uniting. And it`s very successful.
And what`s insane is that Whites believe that “White movements” lead to Holocaust and other such nonsense. I once believed this about White right movements. I thought the people who were ranting about the Jews were all paranoid racists. And if it wasn`t for Kevin, a Professor, saying these things then I probably wouldn`t have taken much interest.
A White movement`s language has to be moderate.
Extreme language is political suicide.
Those whites still unaware of all this stuff need to be handled exceedingly carefully.
Victory through moderation is what we should aim for – so we don`t scare off those White people programmed and manipulated to see White movements as a 4th Reich uprising.
TicTac says:
June 18, 2010 at 8:07 PM
“A White movement’s language has to be moderate. Extreme language is political suicide.”
That depends on who you are dealing with. As conditions continue to deteriorate in America Whites won’t really care what language you use. I understand that the (unorganized) Whites in Arizona are using some very incendiary language themselves with reference to Mexicans.
What we need to stay focused on is the fact that conservatism is a failed strategy. Conservatives generally have a financial/economic interest in keeping society from imploding. After all, they DO have their money and other assets to think about—and revolution is bad for business. We’re not going to be able to deal effectively with the Jews and other non-whites if the social, political, and economic orders remain intact. The conservatives, however, are more than willing to leave our racial enemies within striking distance of White living space if it means they can keep up business as usual and not have to put themselves in harm’s way.
Trying to educate someone on the Jewish Problem.
Example :
Those effin Jews. I effin hate those bloody Jews. Do you know that Jews are behind immigration, they control media, politicians etc.
Fail !
You`ll be disregarded as a racist conspiracy crank and the listener won`t even bother looking at the evidence.
My approach is :
You know, the Jews are a great people and I support Israel,
but there`s a lot of well-educated people who criticise and are saying that Jews are over represented in the media, in politics etc.
And they use this influence to benefit their own people and put Israel`s welfare before that of America, Europe.
Personally, when I bring up the Jewish influence in the Western world the reaction is almost always : you shouldn`t believe what you hear on the Internet.
But, through relentless and persistant verbal warfare, I`ve managed to convince even the most obdurate of my friends that this is true.
I`m starting a new job in a couple of weeks and I can`t wait to covert all these new people I meet.
And also, having a professor to point to, I find, is a great weapon.
mark :
I could be wrong, it`s just my thoughts.
Whatever Kevin thinks is best , is probably best.
TicTac says:
June 18, 2010 at 9:01 PM
mark :
TicTac said:
“Whatever Kevin thinks is best , is probably best.”
Well, with that kind of thinking you run the risk of starting a personality cult.
BTW, I use direct language all the time when discussing the Jewish and race problem when I’m talking to people with very positive results. About half the time they are already aware of it.
TicTac says:
June 18, 2010 at 9:01 PM
mark :
“Whatever Kevin thinks is best , is probably best.”
Well, with that kind of thinking you run the risk of starting a personality cult.
BTW, I use very direct language all the time when discussing the Jewish and race problems with positive results. Most of the time they are already aware of it.
Mark, I don`t mean everybody should worship Kevin. No.
But who am I to contradict or disagree with a respected Professor ?
People like me, new to this Jewish influence stuff, need guidance.
He is a teacher after all.
Mark :
I do have my own ideas – like not being extreme and staying moderate.
I want our race to survive but I don`t want to kill minorities or blame all Jewish people. Or kick all non-Whites out of our nations.
Equal rights for all.
“Kevin should never publicly state “Whites Only” He may as well change his name to Adolf.”
White people are the ones under genocidal attack. White people are the ones who as we speak are undergoing a process of genocide through immigration. This is happening today.
This process has come about through jewish activism. It’s their revenge for Hitler in the same way deliberately starving 6 million white people to death in the Ukraine in 1932 was their revenge for past pogroms.
Immigration-genocide is their final solution to the White Problem.
We are the ones under genocidal attack. Whatever tactics people feel work best for them they should keep sight of where the moral high ground is.
@Zeitgeist
Your slime trail is showing.
TicTac says:
June 18, 2010 at 10:10 PM
Mark :
“I do have my own ideas – like not being extreme and staying moderate. I want our race to survive but I don`t want to kill minorities or blame all Jewish people. Or kick all non-Whites out of our nations. Equal rights for all.”
Your program as stated above is a Jewish program. It’s the program we’ve been on for a while now. It places Whites on a trajectory for genocide. Thanks for exposing yourself.
TicTac says:
June 18, 2010 at 10:01 PM
“People like me, new to this Jewish influence stuff, need guidance.”
Well, here’s some guidance for you:
1) Only extreme measures are going to remove us from the genocidal path we are on because the enemy has control of the media, the educational system, the political apparatus, the police, the military, and the churches. That entire system as it exists now has to be completely upset and destroyed if Whites are to survive.
2) Non-whites must be, and will be, removed from all White living space because 1) if they’re not race-mixing will continue and destroy us, 2) the non-whites have an unwholesome influence on the White culture and their presence alters our society and culture in ways that are not acceptable. We’re not going to be able to have a society where race-mixing is prohibited and where Whites have their own drinking fountains. Even if we were able to have that, however, that would be unacceptable. We need our own exclusive societies and there needs to be a large geographic buffer separating us.
3) Whites are severely oppressed by a multicultural society now and that oppression is about to expand. See here:
Vote system that elected NY Hispanic could expand
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/18/AR2010061803766.html
4) A Jewish presence in White society was necessary for the various political and culture movements which have destroyed traditional White society, two mentioned below.
Jews In The Queer Movement
“The point is that homosexuality is a naturally occurring phenomenon among Jews. It is not a result of the evil influence of the Canaanites, or of anyone else. And Jews, as might have been expected, have been in the forefront of the gay liberation movement since Magnus Hirschfeld, a German Jew, began the Scientific Humanitarian Committee for the liberalization of the anti-gay laws in Germany in 1895. The first gay liberation movement began in Auschwitz, where 250,000 homosexuals died. The modern gay rights movement was started by Jews, and Jews are conspicuous throughout the leadership of the gay liberation movement. The belief that Jews are not prone to homosexuality, or that there are no homosexual Jews, results from abysmal ignorance.” [Bold emphasis added]
from an article entitled Gay Jews by (Jew) Barry Alan Mehler, appearing in Moment magazine (The New Magazine For America’s Jews), February-March 1977 edition, page 24, column 3, paragraph 2
******************************************************************
Jews And The Pornography Industry
“A story little told is that of Jews in Hollywood’s seedier cousin, the adult film industry. Perhaps we’d prefer to pretend that the ‘triple-exthnics’ didn’t exist, but there’s no getting away from the fact that secular Jews have played (and still continue to play) a disproportionate role throughout the adult film industry in America. Jewish involvement in pornography has a long history in the United States, as Jews have helped to transform a fringe subculture into what has become a primary constituent of Americana. These are the ‘true blue Jews’.
and this: “According to one anonymous industry insider quoted by E. Michael Jones in the magazine Culture Wars (May 2003), ‘the leading male performers through the 1980s came from secular Jewish upbringings and the females from Roman Catholic day schools’. The standard porn scenario became as a result a Jewish fantasy of schtupping the Catholic shiksa.”
and this: “Extending the subversive thesis, Jewish involvement in the X-rated industry can be seen as a proverbial two fingers to the entire WASP establishment in America. Some porn stars viewed themselves as frontline fighters in the spiritual battle between Christian America and secular humanism. According to Ford, Jewish X-rated actors often brag about their ‘joy in being anarchic, sexual gadflies to the puritanical beast’. Jewish involvement in porn, by this argument, is the result of an atavistic hatred of Christian authority: they are trying to weaken the dominant culture in America by moral subversion.”
and this: “It is a case of the traditional revolutionary/radical drive of immigrant Jews in America being channeled into sexual rather than leftist politics. Just as Jews have been disproportionately represented in radical movements over the years, so they are also disproportionately represented in the porn industry. Jews in America have been sexual revolutionaries. A large amount of the material on sexual liberation was written by Jews. Those at the forefront of the movement which forced America to adopt a more liberal view of sex were Jewish. Jews were also at the vanguard of the sexual revolution of the 1960s.”
from an article entitled Triple-exthnics by (Jew) Nathan Abrams, appearing in Jewish Quarterly, Winter 2004
A Jewish presence in White society was required for these two movements to flourish.
Mark :
I just didn`t express myself clearly. This is what I meant, what I would like to see happen : Aryans having proper representation. A white guy standing up for white people. Remove all illegal aliens. Guard the Borders. Have a referendum – should we forcibly send back non-whites who are breeding us out. I think the answer would be yes. Yes!
This is what I honestly believe, hope for. But even `tho` this is my view it seems an extreme view, even `tho` it may be necessary.
I know I kinda contradict myself. I was kinda meaning that a political leader should just hide his true intentions. Like, stay moderate `till he gets power, then…
@tictac
We do need a layered approach. Extreme language or ideas is counter-productive with people still in the grip of the multicult as it simply reinforces their conditioning.
@Tic Tac
The terms “extreme” and “extremist” have no meaning in the war we are fighting. Those are terms generally used by the enemy to keep Whites always off-balance and on the defensive when it comes to racial issues. It’s like their use of the term “racist”—designed to make us retreat. Well, we won’t be retreating when called a racist, we’ll confirm it for them that, yes, we are racists and that there is nothing wrong with that.
We’ll apply as much pressure and use as “extreme” of measures that we must in order to survive and prosper.
Morality has no meaning or place in our struggle. The only thing that matters is that we defeat the enemy on the battlefield. Whatever measures are used to accomplish that are moral.
We’re fighting the most dangerous and cunning enemy that anyone has ever fought.
TicTac said:
I know I kinda contradict myself. I was kinda meaning that a political leader should just hide his true intentions. Like, stay moderate `till he gets power, then…
That’s what the conservatives have been trying to do for several decades—the ones that the Jews haven’t co-opted, that is. That strategy is not going to work with the Jews. They’ll see it coming a thousand miles away.
@Mark
“The terms “extreme” and “extremist” have no meaning in the war we are fighting.”
Maybe not in an absolute sense but if the person you’re speaking to at the time thinks you’re too extreme then you are too extreme *for them* at that time. The question then is, if you’re right, how do you get them to see the light?
I’d say someone has to work on those people until they reach a point where the extreme argument doesn’t feel so extreme any more.
That means at least two sets of orgs – extreme and moderate – or “extreme” groups which do both. That’s how leftist type parties work. You have the party and the members do stuff related to the party as a group but they also split into smaller groups and individuals and get involved in mainstream political activity like campaign groups or local politics. The aim is to aid causes which are roughly on the same side and at the same time radicalize people and eventually recruit for the main org.
Wandrin said:
That means at least two sets of orgs – extreme and moderate – or “extreme” groups which do both.
That’s how leftist type parties work. You have the party and the members do stuff related to the party as a group but they also split into smaller groups and individuals and get involved in mainstream political activity like campaign groups or local politics. The aim is to aid causes which are
roughly on the same side and at the same time radicalize people and eventually recruit for the main org.
Yes, I agree with the idea of using front organizations. I take it that is what you’re talking about. But it’s only workable that way if the goals and values of both/all groups are identical, if they both/all have the same radical political agendas, but couch their tactics and strategies in language that is at that particular moment going to get the desired result from the potential recruit.
The passive, weak, and cowardly approaches of the conservatives are going to get us killed and so it’s necessary for White survival to always keep the focus on revolutionary change and not on just making a few modifications to this existing system. The conservatives have been trying to hoodwink boobus americanus for decades using coded language and by appealing to such things like what the Founding Fathers wanted, as if that has any relevance today.
Wandrin : you said – ” Maybe not in an absolute sense but if the person you’re speaking to at the time thinks you’re too extreme then you are too extreme *for them* at that time”
That`s what I was trying to say.
I`ve read a lot of Kevin`s papers and his approach doesn`t seem not at all extreme. He just tells it as it is. Tells the truth. That`s why I said he should stay moderate. There`s no point in him saying “whites only” club `cause no non-whites are going to support a “White movment” anyway. If Kevin was Black he`d be okay. But the Traditional Enemy will just use things like that to convince people that he`s an extremist.
For God`s sake, don`t deny the Holocaust, Kevin.
People are not ready for that. 60 years of propaganda cannot be undone overnight.
Mark – “Well, we won’t be retreating when called a racist, we’ll confirm it for them that, yes, we are racists and that there is nothing wrong with that”
That is extreme.
I`m not a racist in the sense that I actually hate non-whites, or be violent towards them. Even when we get control back I wouldn`t want to murder them all. No. Just a removal of enough of them so they don`t breed us out.
That seems reasonable to me.
Mark,
I like your fighting spirit, and don’t wish to diminish it. Moreover, I have long stated that there must ultimately be population transfer of non-whites out of ancient white patrimonies (ie, Europe). Whites will only remain genetically pure with forced apartheid. Europe is the natural, moral place for such societies to be reestablished. And it’s only just that white indigenes should be allowed to exercise the same rights to communal autonomy in their traditional fatherlands as non-whites do in theirs.
But you are unbelievably naive wrt your understanding of where our people “are at” psychologically – and how change in (at least) America actually works. Absent major cataclysms, revolutionary, extremist rhetoric turns off more people than it convinces. “Proudly White” and similar slogans are wrong for this moment in history. Stick with “Proudly American”, “Middle American”, “Traditional American”, etc. Our enemies get the picture, while our people are not scared off.
You may think do-nothing conservatives are losers, and I suppose they are. But committed racialists are infinitesimal in number. Those conservatives are the people we need to reach (leftists being mentally maladjusted, and worthless to our purpose of racial preservation), if our race is to endure. You have to be nuanced in gaining their trust. Trust an old fighter on these matters.
You may not like the go-slow approach, but it is our only option, absent unforeseen shocks to the system. I’m not happy with our situation, either, but reality must be faced ruthlessly.
TicTac says:
June 20, 2010 at 2:29 AM
Mark – “Well, we won’t be retreating when called a racist, we’ll confirm it for them that, yes, we are racists and that there is nothing wrong with that”
TicTac said:
“That is extreme.
It only seems “extreme” to you because you have allowed the enemy to define what is “extreme” and you have accepted the enemies definition of it.
TicTac said:
I`m not a racist in the sense that I actually hate non-whites, or be violent towards them. Even when we get control back I wouldn`t want to murder them all. No. Just a removal of enough of them so they don`t breed us out. That seems reasonable to me.
Then you are a conservative, not a White Nationalist or White revolutionary, especially since you are ok with leaving non-whites inside of White living space.
Of the remaining non-whites, the ones you want to leave inside of White society, is it ok with you if they interbreed with Whites or should there be laws against it?
Leon Haller says:
June 20, 2010 at 5:57 AM
But you are unbelievably naive wrt your understanding of where our people “are at” psychologically – and how change in (at least) America actually works. Absent major cataclysms, revolutionary, extremist rhetoric turns off more people than it convinces. “Proudly White” and similar slogans are wrong for this moment in history. Stick with “Proudly American”, “Middle American”, “Traditional American”, etc. Our enemies get the picture, while our people are not scared off.
Yes, I know that they are for the most part passive, brainwashed cowards. However, the pace of change in terms of White racial consciousness is increasing and with that increase I believe we can get away with a more advanced rhetoric that we couldn’t use even 10 years ago. We mustn’t try to fool them. We need to be honest about what we are saying. The conservatives have been fooling them for decades now and we should not be emulating that. I think that with the Whites in Arizona, for example, since 70% or so of them agree with Arizona SB1070, we can use more realistic talk. And in the coming months and years Whites are going to be very receptive to rhetoric that they heretofore thought was “extreme”, especially when there is a plan to let the Mexicans in this country, and probably later all non-whites, have six votes for every White vote. See here:
Vote system that elected NY Hispanic could expand
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/18/AR2010061803766.html
You may think do-nothing conservatives are losers, and I suppose they are. But committed racialists are infinitesimal in number. Those conservatives are the people we need to reach (leftists being mentally maladjusted, and worthless to our purpose of racial preservation), if our race is to endure. You have to be nuanced in gaining their trust. Trust an old fighter on these matters.
But we only need to reach these conservatives if they are useful to us and that means that they have to get rid of their conservative ways and think more racial, more folkish, more collectivist, more group-think. I don’t think that’s going to happen much because the conservatives are more concerned with money than they are with race; they think individualist, and that means that they won’t be getting rid of their conservative thinking and because of that most of them have zero value to us.
You may not like the go-slow approach, but it is our only option, absent unforeseen shocks to the system. I’m not happy with our situation, either, but reality must be faced ruthlessly.
I don’t believe that the go-slow approach is our only option. I think that all of the options will be and are being used. Different approaches work with different people and on this website I think that more a realistic, radical tone is appropriate—especially since Dr. MacDonald is not holding back or using the go-slow approach when it comes to naming the Jew. Those who are offended by radical verbiage should go to the John Birch Society site.
We need a spiritual revolution of Whites that holds White life–its birth, and its expansion to fill all niches and all lands with itself, such that there is no room for any others–as our highest goal.
Instead of a few White nationalists marching around a town square, they should be doing everything in their power to have as many children as possible. And, this means they should have children out of wedlock, in traditional marriages, and in polygamous marriages. The goal should be to increase our numbers by all means possible. Period.
That’s the way we will survive and win. That is nature’s way.
Expand always; contract never.
“Different approaches work with different people”
I think that’s the key thing.
Mark:
I would like to see it put to a vote. If Aryans wanted to completely remove all non-Aryans, then I wouldn`t fight against that.
As for mixed-race types – they are not Aryan, so we could have a non-Aryan controlled community – enjoying all the rights we have, but obviously not allowed to participate in things like politics, media, finance and education. And if Aryans do race-mix, then their hybrids won`t be classed as Aryan – which is a good incentive not to mix.
Race mixing will destroy us, so there should be blood-protection laws.
Mixed-race types are complicated to deal with, civilly and humanely.
So my – non-Aryan controlled community, is a good idea.
All non-Aryans would be in this category. Whites won`t race-mix if they know their hybrids will fall into this non-Aryan controlled community.
(Controlling their numbers/breeding. Mix-raced types are in limbo).
Breeding them out is better than harming them, but that`s still too-extreme, and really is unexceptable, I think, for decent Aryans.
We need to set-aside some lands for these types.
We Aryans wouldn`t be treated as good as this if we were minorities.
As for whether a political leader would have success saying these kind of things, I don`t know. Wandrin said something about a layered approach, I`d agree with that – hit our enemies at all angles.
America is what, 60% white majority ? You are 10% from racial suicide!
The Brits will be an ethnic minority in some 60 years!