For the past few days, Tottenham and a few other vibrantly multicultural areas of London have been experiencing diversity’s strength.
It has taken the shape of chairs smashing shop widows, Molotov cocktails igniting autobuses, Black fists smashing White faces, charging youths hurling missiles, private enterprise going up in flames, and police officers going down to hospital.
It has also taken the shape of a wave of socialism, which has swept through the high streets redistributing wealth, transforming shops into great piñatas to be exploded, with TVs, iPods, trainers, mobile phones, jewellery, chemist products, carpets, and booze of various grades and descriptions being transferred from shops to local residents in thousands of unrecorded transactions, at all hours of the night and day, without need for shop assistance.
Diversity’s strength is seldom experienced in such magnitude and with such euphoria, and this has prompted commentators to theorise as to the causes. After all, the event that caused multiculturalism suddenly to flex its muscle—the martyring by the police of a Black cocaine dealer and gang member, who apparently resisted arrest and whose gun was subsequently recovered at the scene—took place on Thursday last week, and the initial calls for justice have since evolved into the joyous celebration of hands-on socialism described above.
In evidence has been the great creativity of the theories that have been advanced. Diversity’s newly grown musculature has been variously blamed on poverty, idle youth, excessive urbanisation, overcrowding, alienation, the government’s austerity measures, the Summer heat, Twitter, BlackBerry’s messenger service, too many White policemen, unemployment, the city’s Mayor being on holiday, and a ‘tiny unrepresentative minority’ of thugs and criminals.
Unfortunately, in the eagerness to display their originality and intellectual flair, said commentators have conspicuously neglected the first explanation that came to my mind, to the point that, out of a need to heighten my amusement, I imagined a scenario where this was all product of a tacitly coordinated effort to drown consumers of mainstream media in a morass of alternative perspectives, hoping that in this way the omission will pass unnoticed.
Since I live in sheep country, surrounded by green hills bare of human habitation, I felt somewhat left out of the party, so I decided to join in the fun by advancing my own theory:
Could it not be that human biodiversity in the affected areas of London may have something to do with the very idiosyncratic interpretations of public etiquette and wealth creation we have witnessed via our television screens?
I say that because some fifteen years ago I happened to pass through Tottenham in London and had the opportunity to sample the vibrancy of that community. The previous year I had also passed through some of the other areas currently being swept by multicultural joy. Shop signs displayed a dizzying array of languages and scripts; butchers offered meat to challenge even the stoutest of digestive systems; newsagents exhibited an impressive depth of coverage in the chthonic regions of tabloid and Urdu-speaking journalism; and kitchen fans attached to restaurants expelled exotic aromas reminiscent of cumin, rice, and fried poultry laced with samonella, e-coli, and avian flu. All the same, it was not quite foreign-occupied land, for, in fact, both corner shops and off-licences betrayed a great deal of ecological adaptation to the Western diet by the local residents, who supplemented their ethnic staples with a diet of carbonated drinks, crisps, vegelate, and strong booze. Indeed, they seemed spoilt for choice when it came to sampling the Western menu: any one of them seeking to eat out, or in, Western-style, had a McDonalds, a Burger King, a Pizza Hut, a Perfect Pizza, and a Domino’s Pizza, all within walking distance. In short, there was much of anything and everything, jumbled up together, compressed into a small and densely populated area, where it was possible to hear just about any language (193 are spoken), not including broken and heavily accented versions of Cockney.
I say also because this multiplicity of forms has also been noted by one Rizwana Hamid, who, speaking to the BBC, analysed the phenomenon in terms of a confluence of ‘many, many, many different communities coming together’, living check-by-jowl in an intensely urbanised area. And she is not exaggerating, for, alongside the many Colombians, Congolese, Albanians, Kurds, Turks, Turkish-Cypriots, Somalis, and Ghanaians, in Tottenham 113 ethnic groups share in the bliss.
That tallies pleasurably well with my own observations, even though from a time when diversity had not yet gone on a course of anabolic steroids, supplied by the enriching immigration policy of Tony Blair’s Labour government.
The astonishing richness of ethnicities is also replicated at the gang level. One of them, Tottenham Mandem, is described in Wikipedia as
composed of over a dozen affiliated sets, according to geographical location[, including] Stargang, Bloodline, Broadwater Farm, Reed Road CRIPZ, Bruce Castle Kings, Bruce Grove, Chestnut Black Gang, Ida Bloodstarz, NPK, Philip Lane Boys, Scotland Green, Tower Gardens Black Bandana Gang (New Youngers Set), Stonebridge Mandem (Ermine / Plevna / Stonebridge), Broad Lane, Suffolk & Twyford Goons, [and] Tiverton Piru & Selby Road.
These have greatly contributed to the local economy with recreational psychotropic products not found in the supermarket. They have also livened up the nightlife with sounds that British people previously only heard in American Westerns and television cop shows. The cremation industry is booming.
Evidently, such variety and constant excitement generates unexpected synergies, which, as we have seen, make Tottenham residents more susceptible than their fellow Londoners to rapturous displays of exuberance.
Yet, if we are looking for causes, this is merely to scratch the surface, for this multicultural paradise did not spontaneously generate. The latter is the product of decades of hard work by British politicians, who since the 1950s have been enthusiastic proponents of racial diversity, establishing a stellar record of commitment to alleviating the dull Whiteness of this isle through a generous and constant infusion of colour. By far the most distinguished record belongs to Tony Blair’s Labour government, which early on put into operation an ambitious programme to trounce his predecessors in this endeavour, opening up immigration to the world and liberating the Home Office from the burden of accurately keeping track of incomers. This was a very bold move, much commented upon when it came to light some years ago, and thus Britons have much to thank him for.
Perhaps the reason commentators in the media are skirting around the racial dimension, and avoiding racialist analyses, is that they realise that, absent the racial element, Tottenham residents would have been deprived of the excitement of the past few days. I imagine they do not wish to inflame the Whites who have so far been denied a say on how much diversity they are entitled to.
With good timing, the independent British thinktank, Civitas, has called for the Equality and Human Rights Commission to be abolished, taking the view that the body has failed to create meaningful equality and, with a £53,000,000 budget, offers poor value for money. I agree, as with full equality the joys of multiculturalism would have been evenly distributed across the country, and not restricted to Tottenham and selected areas of London.
Not surprisingly the police, the London mayor, and the government are proving unpopular, both among the jubilant youths celebrating their diversity in the streets, and the mean-spirited Whites who resent all the excitement and would like it quickly contained. The police have had an especially challenging task, trying to balance their ethnic sensitivity training (nowadays a copious portion of their training manuals) against their more prosaic duties, such as preventing the destruction of property and the assaulting and mugging of pedestrians.
Marvelled by this impressive display of diversity’s strength, we can expect much debate to follow in the aftermath of the party. Proponents of diversity will no doubt feel much encouraged to intensify their efforts to promote it and to visit it upon diversity-deprived areas, for the events in Tottenham will have convincingly demonstrated to them that much more of it is needed. This is certainly true here, where I live: there is zero diversity and the past few days have passed in sleepy tranquillity, with nearby villagers content to enjoy the simple pleasures of fresh air and beautiful scenery, secure in the knowledge that their homes and their shops will still be there when they return.
Facing the Future as a Minority
Was the Immigration Act of 1924 Illiberal?
out of idle curiosity, just what is dat white boy doing in front of the bro?
Glad to see that some humanity has returned to TOO. Whiteness is so boring, and fuddy-duddy, and the multiple enriching experiences of the last couple nights make for more fun than jewTV here in the US. Thanks Alex
Apparently the British egalitarians have tried everything except “midnight basketball” to make their inter-racial world of make-believe a shining example of democratic “equality”. Mr. Churchill, what have you and some of these brain-dead Anglos wrought??
Honestly, what will it take to wake our people up? How many more rapes, riots, and murders must we sit through before a light goes off in people’s thick heads?
What happened to our people????????????
Once, we were Vikings, Conquistadors, explorers, brave souls with a will of steel and an irrepressible sense of adventure. Today we’re just a bunch of sad faced, broken fools content to sit in front of the tv and get fat whilst all that our ancestors created is stolen from us right in front of our very faces. Where are the Charles Martels of this age? Where are the Enoch Powels, ready to stand up and speak out, and, dare I say it, take DIRECT ACTION!
I’m so ready to get out in the streets and counter riot, my entire body shakes with the eagerness, but where are OUR shock troops? What the hell happened to my people? Why did we allow this to happen to OUR lands? Is all that’s left just these disgusting, obese Wal Mart types too busy trying to rap along to their favorite black “artist” to realize that their world is truly ending?
You know what, people who let this happen to them deserve it. Anyone who cowers in the face of these creatures and makes excuses for them deserves to be beaten down by them. The white race has two choices today: Die out or be reborn. Grab your balls and wake the F*&^ up!
I’m wondering if most white British still feel that they won WWII ?
Some of the rioters are using social media to communicate with one another. Funny, they have direct internet access and obviously a working internet connection–luxuries when you think about it–but for some reason are labelled as have-nots by media outlets? I seriously doubt they desire honest jobs or work (God knows most of them lack the credentials or the education to even hold a job as a cashier in a gas station), and I doubt that they’re starving underprivileged innocents looking to redistribute wealth.
The truth is that due to the multicultural environment beig suffered we are seeing a bunch of aggressive, confused, and aimless brutes wreck everything they see in front of them. Wrought from a system of diversity which because of its inherent weakness is incapable of sustaining an educational institution, they have no unity or direction and hate the country which houses them.
@John hearns: Gods forbid, they could have been speaking German right now………….
Is that a black mother with here kids in the one picture ?
It’s tugs at the heart to see a tight family unit …
” Ok , mah chillins , yawll be carefoe when you be gettin me dat flat screen tv . Yow mama ain’t be raizin no child that be gittin a beatin when there be some good riotin happenin . “
Awesome sarcasm. Placing the blame of rioting blacks on white people just doesn’t fly anymore. Sucks for them that their 50 year old “blame whitey for black mistakes” paradigm is finally being mocked and ridiculed for the BS that it is. I’ve got the feeling whiteys had enough and with the coming economic crisis, the process has been expedited-
Do White concessions made to blacks promote black on white violence in the same manner of a shark reacting to blood in the water?lol
Is there a historical trend proving blacks riot as a means to steal goods from a naive White government?
Do black citizens in the UK and America actually realize how bad it is in Africa?
Why do they not fear deportation then and in turn, respect the host culture?
Lastly, why is the coddling of ungrateful enclaves, whos presence is both a quantitative and qualitative burden upon the host population, tolerated?
@Fenria:
Or they could have appeased and saved their empire and shared a European culture and standard of living that would make the one that they have now look like a race riot in comparison .
Oh yeah , it really is a race riot that they ” won ” .
@John hearns:
Well, Mr. Hearns — it seems the English may now be learning a latent lesson as to what it means to be a ‘Volk’. An understanding of that word requires a realisation that different races carry different, historical narratives. Unfortunately, free-market capitalism and so-called ‘Enlightenment Age’ egalitarianism continue to deride the value of racial preservation.
Slowly but surely: our pan-European world is coming to terms with this dystopia in the making. How will the so-called ‘elite’ answer when presented with piercing, Socratic questions about our white status in the world?
Here’s one question: is money so important at the expense of our white race?
@Fenria:
Interested in what you mean by this comment. I take it as sarcasm or ridicule. But are you saying that German occupation would have been nice by comparison or are you ridiculing the idea that German occupation would have happened at all?
@Edgardus de la Vega:
How will the so-called ‘elite’ answer when presented with piercing, Socratic questions about our white status in the world?
Here’s one question: is money so important at the expense of our white race?
I’m beginning to feel like a freeloader with a recent flurry of comments that are actually questions. Nonetheless, here’s another: Could you share with us a list of some of the most salient Socratic questions?
The events we see in the UK and in Wisconsin will continue until White men defy the laws of the land and start conducting guerrilla warfare against our enemies. No amount of blogging or book review writing is going to change a thing.
I wonder how the Brits are enjoying multi-culturism tonight?
@Anon2:
Let me put it this way for you. My entire family going back a recorded three hundred years, and most likely much longer than that unrecorded, is English. And I would have much rather taken the slings and arrows of whatever Hitler and the Germans had in store for England, which I doubt would have been anywhere near as bad as the propaganda of the day made it sound, instead of this wholesale genocide of my people, our culture, and our lands wrought upon us at the hands of multiculturalism and it’s agenda setters, the evil that dare not speaketh it’s name. Got it?
The master plan is comming along just swimmingly.
A great article Alex.
@Edgardus de la Vega:
I don’t believe that most white elites solely ” do it for the money ”
They are what they are because they are ambitious and they want to win and to have prestige .
If the culture is rigged so that success and prestige is seen as being color blind and politically correct and to have lots of toys then that is the ideal that these people strive for .
It is a social/cultural thing . If white nationalism was made to be prestigious then they would be WN’s .
It’s the culture that needs to be re-captured .
I hope the British will finally realize that Enoch Powell was right with his “rivers of blood” speech.The Labour governement with its crazy immigration policy is guilty of a colossal crime against its own people.Blacks will be blacks, always and everywhere.The only positive thing is the recent demand to abolish the notorious Equality and Human Rights Commission.What Britain needs instead is an Inequality and Coloured Deportation Commission.An idea whose time has come!
@John hearns:
The Jews won WW ll with all that it entails.
@Franklin Ryckaert:
I know that and you know that but does England know that ? and that was my whole point .
Alex,
Among all your poetry, you seem to forget the most important, is that our white leadership is also acting like looting “Niggers”; and that they may be complicit with these events.
Identical to the uprising in the French suburbs before the 2007 election which purpose were to put the UMP in the Élysée; these pseudo “spontaneous” events seem always timed with important decisions by our leadership.
One hour after the S&P downgrade last Friday, a Helicopter gets shot down with the biggest number of one day American casualties in the Afghan war.
Yesterday, the London police got out in the streets in force 15 minutes after the Feds decision to leave interest rates intact, which appeared to have the magical effect of curing all of the economy at ounce in a single hour, if we looked at the corrupt financial markets as a barometer ( but in fact it is only a barometer of institutionalized corruption).
As I always maintain, if you are a financial market whore, there is not much to believe in any political proposition you offer. And that is why when we observe these attitudes from the white house to congress, through all of the media, all you have are stock market whores that will do anything for a bull and a bubble; there is much to believe that all these “spontaneous ” events of disorder and violence, of disturbances and disruptions, have much to do with our white leadership turned “Nigger” on us. Maybe it is something you should envisage, Bernanke as the mother of all “White Niggers”. And among ourselves, who are the “white niggers” that vie for the corruption of finance turned drug dealers.
@mark: Thank God! Someone finally said it! The reason we are all stuck in this blog to intellectualise about this crisis, is because that is what we have allowed ourselves to be reduced to. We are allowed to ‘talk’, but even then, blogs such as this are compelled by law to impose limits on what people can say. In particular there is a widespread prohibition in most Western countries against any statement which could be construed as inciting hatered against a particular race, ethnic group or ‘people’, unless it’s about whites. So, we are really stuffed unless people can break free of what is clearly a deterimination to prevent white people from forming a ‘meeting of minds’ with the purpose of getting our act together.
On the issue of the media coverage of the UK race riots (yes, that’s what they are!), it has been quiet amazing to watch the lunatic left internationalists going into verbal overdrive on every media outlet. It’s almost funny, if it were not so serious, to watch these morons prattle on with one social theory after the other. And, and, and! Not once has the racial element been acknowledged. The racial element to these riots is right at the core of the issue, and everyone knows about it, but no one in the media will speak its name.
“In this country in 15 or 20 years’ time the black man will have the whip hand over the white man.”
Enoch Powell, Rivers of Blood Speech.
I love it. Can’t think of another place more deserving to be burnt to the ground. But if turn-about is fair play maybe the UN should bomb them and send in troops, since London likes that so much everywhere else.
Time to kill these black bastards and their white left trash Wigger friends. PERIOD. Nothing more to discuss.
@John hearns: Amongst the English it has been common parlance since the 1970s to gripe to one another: we lost the war!
The unacknowledged problem of course is that we never bothered to seek proper answers to the next obvious question: to whom did we lose it?
Besides the pictures of the arsons,the plundered TV-shop and the Black mother teaching her offspring the basics of Black Culture (looting),I think the picture of the White man submissively parting with his clothes to a Black man is most disgusting.As far as can be gathered from the photo the Black man is unarmed and probably alone.So why is the White man acting so cowardly?Why does he not fight for his honour or at least run away?This picture is as symbolic of the current pathology of the White race as is the one of that kneeling White woman asking “forgiveness for slavery” to a Black man in a previous article.This is what the Culture of Guilt leads to.
Will the leaders of Europe who were so courageous recently to remark that “multiculturalism has failed” now dare to say the same and draw the only logical conclusion from it i.e. stopping and reversing non-White immigration?
These are not riots; they are insurrections.
Here on the West Coast of the US, in California, one gets the impression that the rioters are WHITES.
The live update states that “Rioters as Young as Nine are Looting” — with a picture of (what else) a young White boy.
White residents of Eltham (who were joined by the “far-right EDL”) and Enfield who are turning out to protect their homes and loved ones are being referred to as vigilantes and right-wing extremists!
In Enfield, scene of Sunday’s looting, vigilante groups have taken to the streets to protect homes and business from mob rule, while in Southall near Ealing, hundreds of Sikhs are standing guard outside their temple in an act of defiance against the rioters.
Notice the difference? The Sikhs are “standing guard outside their temple agains the rioters” yet the Whites are referred to as vigilantes and far-right extremists. Do you think the Whites will be rounded up and prosecuted? Blame place on the English Defence League?
As for those who survived WW II, fought and lost loved ones during that time, here is a wonderful article: This isn’t the Britain We Fought For:
The author rounded off his request with this question: ‘Are you happy with how your country has turned out? What do you think your fallen comrades would have made of life in 21st-century Britain?’
What is extraordinary about the 150 replies he received, which he has now published as a book, is their vehement insistence that those who made the ultimate sacrifice in the war would now be turning in their graves.
People come here, get everything they ask, for free, laughing at our expense,’ was a typical observation.
We old people struggle on pensions, not knowing how to make ends meet. If I had my time again, would we fight as before? Need you ask?
Our country has been given away to foreigners while we, the generation who fought for freedom, are having to sell our homes for care and are being refused medical services because incomers come first.
http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2009/11/this_isnt_the_b.php
Today’s LATimes: But there appeared to be no social or geographical boundaries for the groups of young people who, as the riots gathered pace, used social networks to line up the next target, looting and burning their way through entire neighborhoods with the knowledge that they could outrun police in heavy riot gear. …
The continuing riots are a kind of “imitation” of the Tottenham protest, “which was very much a stance against the police, who were seen as losing legitimacy in the eyes of a section of the community,” Brown said. “When that stand took place, you saw young people realize, ‘Wow, we’re actually taking a stance.’ Then they realized that they could get away with it.” No one has been able to profile them, he said, “but I wouldn’t be surprised if many of them come from hostels or families where they weren’t accountable to parents; if you find an 11-year-old on the roads after midnight, you have to ask questions.”
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-london-riots-20110810,0,919931.story
@John hearns: Well, then we must look at the condition of their ego in light of this ‘ambition’ and ‘prestige’ for its own sake. How about ‘values’? In our case: racial values?
You’re basically stating these ‘elites’ are willing to sell themselves irrespective of climate as long as their egos are recognised and furnished with materialism. Such is a basic problem (hence, my use of the term ‘Socratic questions’ as to seeking a consistency of principles from the political class).
Given their lust for ‘prestige’ and ‘ambition’: by contrast — a true, cultural vanguard of leaders (as opposed to political ‘opportunists’) is the preferred stock. En fin: a rightly spirited political body for the culture to be re-captured.
Two million British Muslims should count their Ramadan (month of fasting) blessings for not being blamed for these riots by the pro-Israel and vehemently anti-Muslim British Defence League. According to the New York Times (August 5, 2011) the main winner of these protests and riots – is no other than the Jewish leader of the British Opposition, Ed Milliband.
“The uproar over The News of the World and its ramifications for Rupert Murdoch’s media empire, as well as for rival newspapers that have been implicated in the phone hacking and other abuses, have changed much in Britain. The scandal has also raised difficult, career-threatening questions for Prime Minister David Cameron and has led to a stunning reversal in fortunes for the 41-year-old Mr. Miliband, who as recently as last spring appeared to be sinking fast as Labour’s new helmsman,” wrote John F. Burns in NYT.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2011/08/10/david-cameron-faces-his-arab-spring/
The blacks are willing to riot to get a new tv or whatever. The whites have lost their country, in many cases the lives of their family, and whatever they once had of honor and self-respect; and they are still complacent and apathetic. Need more be said?
@ “The events we see in the UK and in Wisconsin will continue until White men defy the laws of the land and start conducting guerrilla warfare against our enemies. No amount of blogging or book review writing is going to change a thing.” – Mark
@ “Mark, Thank God! Someone finally said it! The reason we are all stuck in this blog to intellectualise about this crisis, is because that is what we have allowed ourselves to be reduced to.” – Jon Wood
Mark and Jon: you just nailed it. Time to order The Brigade from Amazon and start to think seriously…
The international media reaction is interesting. Deutschewelle the national ” Frankfurt School” German broadcasting service is portraying them as the poor in Britain fighting agaisnt injustice ie a Marxist interpretation.
Curiously these riots are only in England where nearly a million Jamaicans and their descendants live. They are not occurring in Scotland because less than a thousand Jamaicans live there. More accurately they should be called Jamaican riots.
@anstelede:
Yet complacent, pussified whites are symbollically approving of the riots through their inaction and lack of agency to defend their homeland.(must be christianity’s fault) Oops you mean England is a secular country now?? HOW IS THIS HAPPENING THEN!??LOL
-I wonder why white hoardes are not cleansing the streets in honor of their homeland and their ancestors? Obviously the government has sold them down the river and cannot be counted on to defend White citizenry.
-At least Russia has a rep of beating the tar out of non-white foreigners. After seeing how non-whites repay whites for their hospitality and goodwill letting them into their country, can one really blame the Russians?
Greetings from Somalia on Thames! (only kidding, I’m up North). There has been some curiosity on this site as to the lack of coverage of the race aspect of the riots. This is easily explained by the UK National Union of Journalists guidelines on racism:
http://www.mediawise.org.uk/www.mediawise.org.uk/display_page8a15.html?id=648
As you can see, in crime reporting you only mention a person’s race if it is “relevant” (i.e. white on black “racism”).
Despite the guidelines, I had another ‘Macdonald moment’ reading the following from an Asian Telegraph blogger. She’s a former schooolteacher recalling a police liaison event in London:
“At school I remember watching a presentation given to the kids by Trident, the Metropolitan Police Service unit set up to investigate and inform communities of gun crime in London’s black community. I didn’t know what Trident was then, and it struck me that all of the photos of people shot (the idea was to scare the kids) were black. So at the end, I approached one of the policemen and asked him what percentage of those involved in gun crime were black. I kid you not, but my question made this thirty-something white man who was, after all, trained to deal with the black community and its issues, turn pink. He explained that about 80 per cent of gun crime took place in the black community. I smiled uncomfortably. But no, he said, it was worse than that. Then he told me that 80 per cent was black on black gun crime, and that of the remaining 20 per cent about 75 per cent involved at least one black person: black shooting white, or white shooting black. I pushed to know more. While he kept saying his stats were crude and he didn’t have scientific numbers, on the whole the whites who were involved in these shootings tended to be from Eastern Europe.”
It’s a shame we have to turn to the USA to read what is happening in the UK. Well done TOO.
Here’s a lively clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rC_VsYxLao4
It looks as if there’s some white boys involved in the much-publicized case of a bleeding boy being gently helped and just as gently robbed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qwRC0ORE4I
Yes, that’s a distressing clip.
@Anglo Saxon: WORLD WAR II TO KILL WHITE PEOPLE AND TO MAKE THE WORLD SAFER FOR COMMUNISM
Get the word out however you can to Americans. There a very few forums, of course, but if you post comments on every news site that allows it, it can make a difference. We can share links of those and vote them up and add to them.
Also Dr. M, what is the strategy behind the comment changes here? Does it help ad revenue to have to multi click? We understand if that’s it otherwise I don’t.
for example here’s my latest LA times comment:
at 4:05 PM August 10, 2011
I’m jewish and I object to this notion that we own the MSM and started the unions, welfare, and immigration just to rise to power over the good people of this country who should have kicked us out. We’re just like the Finns. Sorta.
And another at the WSJ:
8:10 pm August 10, 2011
Anonymous wrote:
.Why is everyone afraid to address the most obvious issue here? Axelrod, Rahm, the MSM and only 2% of the rest of us are Jewish liberals. Why are they running the country? Grow some before it’s over which is tomorrow. “Well we were waiting for 60 Minutes to investigate it”
“Diversity’s strength is seldom experienced in such magnitude and with such euphoria, and this has prompted commentators to theorise as to the cause”
Yes, the news eggheads are always wringing their hands after these events theorizing about “possible causes”. Laughable. There is no theorizing necessary: Blacks are savages and revert to the behavior of their former environs just as soon as behavioral restrictions (read force) that kept them in line is removed. End of story.
For modern examples of what “normality” is within black run nations, you need only look to Liberia (cannibalism being currently practiced), Somalia (a great example of how blacks will kill each other when they don’t have white victims readily to hand) and Zimbabwe, one of the most pitifully run formerly well-off (under White rule, of course) nations in Africa. Today they can’t feed themselves. Good thing the former White Rhodesians left them to their own devices.
@Fenria: Fenria:
“What happened to our people????????????”
Partly it may well be that World Wars 1 and 2 both stripped us of our best young people (and genetic stock) for all time. It was a tremendous loss of some of our best people. And for what? To serve Jewish interests in killing off our own racial brethren. And sadly, to this day you will find “patriotic” White dolts (not just the few veterans left of WW2 but younger ones who should know better) that will defend those wars, again, as if our shores were somehow threatened by a war 6000 miles away. Sounds similar to what is going on in the Middle East today, wouldn’t you say? It is amazing how our people will die for the Jew and continue to do so. Arab people would hold no grudge against us were it not for our constant backing of the little bully nation of Israel.
“I’m so ready to get out in the streets and counter riot, my entire body shakes with the eagerness, but where are OUR shock troops? What the hell happened to my people? Why did we allow this to happen to OUR lands? ”
You are the exception then, obviously! Your peers (the Walmart rap buyers, are so identified with the blacks, so brainwashed by both the (originally Frankfurt School inspired) miseducation they received that they truly believe it is a bad thing to be White, that it is evil to be proud of being White, are afraid of losing their job (if they still have one) and/or actually WANT to be black. Yes, I even knew a White man at my former job who wore the “gangsa” type clothing, tried hard to speak jive (“ebonics”) and practically grovelled at the feet of the (many) black employees that we had so as to be “in” with them. Funny…he never seemed to notice that they were laughing at him behind his back, poor deluded slob that he was.
@Edgardus de la Vega: “Here’s one question: is money so important at the expense of our white race? ”
-I suspect that the answer would depend on the race of the person asking the question to begin with. Certainly, for Jewish bankers and arms merchants, the answer would be a resounding “NO”. Oh, and should you be of the mind that Jews are White, I would hasten to reply that they do not view themselves as such, but hold the view that they are a separate race of people, and superior to others to boot. Oddly similar to the point of view that they claim the Nazis held. Hmmmm….
@John hearns: “Or they could have appeased and saved their empire and shared a European culture and standard of living that would make the one that they have now look like a race riot in comparison . ”
Ha, Yes indeed! However, when this is pointed out to them, Brits will dutifully defend their ancestors decision to fight the Germans tooth and nail. This I know from having posted on a few boards in the Uk on the topic. I was “severely chastised” and “verbally rebuked” for having suggested such, lol.
More strength for Jewish Lobby in London. This time instead of chasing immigrants – it’s chasing Dean of RAF.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2011/08/11/dean-of-raf-lobby-under-lobbys-knife/
@John hearns: Certainly do, very emphatically in fact.
@Sean Grant: Very nicely thankyou, since it is multiculturalism that will create peace on the streets and nothing else
I thought I would include Ms. Miller’s comments to illustrate the mindset of the opposition. Multiculturalism equals peace. Love is hate, up is down, etc.
@Curt:
They don’t want the truth because it would turn their world upside down .
I guess they prefer the rioters to do that for them .
@John hearns: Where’s this race riot then? Not very evident is it when youth of all races are involved in the rioting.
@Franklin Ryckaert: Hmm reversing non-white immigration, how far back shall we go, the Welsh and the Scott’s first perhaps, the Celts were dark skinned when they arrived.
Enough for now I suppose, lets see how many survive the ‘editorial’
Afro savages go on a rampage in the beautiful seaside resort of Bari, Italy demanding to be recognized as ‘refugees’ and granted legal status.
http://www.eutimes.net/2011/08/asylum-seekers-riot-in-bari-italy/
I actually caught that report on a foreign news channel. Not sure whether it had aired in the States on our Judaic IQ reducer.
Talking of Italy, several years back a gang of gypsies operating out of Naples reportedly kidnapped an Italian girl for ransom. The parents of kidnapped child decided to turn for help to the local branch of Camorra. Which then descended on the gypsy tent-city in the burbs of Naples, razed it to to the ground and beat to a pulp whatever gypsy they could get their hands on.
Around the same time period, a group of local residents complained to a different Camorra wing about out-of-control drug dealing by Nigerian ‘immigrants’ taking place in their neighborhood. As a pack of Afros was working the corner that night, they were MACHINE-GUNNED down by the camorristi. No warning, no nothing !
@anstelede:
There are rumours or speculation of cadres of “black bloc” dressed people in the center of the London riots. These are anarcho-communists who turn up at, for instance, anti-globalisation ralleys etc and act as “agent provocateur” to turn up the agression. I’m not sure if they had a role in escalating the riots/looting etc but I suspect they would have been interested. Probably use blackberries, because of their encryption, to communicate.
@Curt: Well yes — one can presume varying
parties (i.e. various races) may answer differently. Given the possessive nature of the question: that is to say posing such a fundamental question unto ourselves — what is the answer? Yes or no?
@Jarvis Dingle-Daden:
The Commora provide a better service than the police, for instance ensuring the goods a drug addict has stollen can be returned. Of course they have helped turn Naples into a bit of a mess: illegally dumped industrial waste has meant that farmland has had to be abandoned due to animal mutations and contact dermititis it causes.
This happened in France, perhaps 4X as bad, and yet, it did not make the news as large. Perhaps this shows us how England is still tied to America, at least by language. And isn’t THIS the year of the dozens of American Black on White Flash Mobs? My aren’t we congruent in certain cultural idiosyncracies.
@Franklin Ryckaert:
No, they will not. The media painted this as a ‘white’ thing. It will take many years of this, many levels of interacting negatively with the minority population, but will they ever get to the J-Question, and what is to be done, when every politit-ian is sucking off of the J-tit?
Plus, if it does get hairy for them, they will just do a false-Flug op, to maintain power.
Its just a slow, strangulation. The Brits, as Americans, may hardly notice.
@Lancashire lad:
Lancashire Lad;
Hell, at least your UK newspaper is telling their policy as it really is in that document. I doubt that we could find a statement like that made to the public here in the US. Our media merely do the same thing as yours in their reporting, but claim they are being “fair”.
@Edgardus de la Vega:
Edgardus;
I understood what you meant, but merely was inserting a little humor. Of course the answer from White people should be “NO”, but unfortunately, to many of our race money (and above all, job security-especially with a “good” job) will supercede racial loyality 99% of the time. I really do wish that I were wrong about that, but observation over a lifetime surely seems to bear out the truth of this. That is to the eternal shame of our race, and unfortunately, I have to say that while Jews have no morality regarding the welfare of outsiders, they trump us with flying colors when it comes to “looking out for their own”. A Jew who hurts other Jews (such as Bernie Madoff) is rare. And take note that Madoff is actually in jail. If he had hurt only the goyim, he would still be out there plying his “trade”.
Fine essay, just the right tone. That stillshot is a classic: “Urban White Liberal Experiences Joys of Multiculturalism”. Because the Brits submitted to gun control, they cannot effectively resist the Jews and their ethnic stormtroopers. Here, as Civil War II escalates – Jews, ethnoids, white libs/gov’t employees vs. all the rest of us – matters will go quite differently. The pessimism of many of these comments mystifies me. If you are not weaponed up yet, do it while you still have the chance. Gunfighter Nation.
Funny how these same mainstream media applauded the use of Facebook and Twitter, of cell phones, to bring thousands out on the street. In Tunisia or Cairo, Egypt or Tehran, that is.
When it happens in Merrie Olde England, they say cell phone communication should be jammed and howl that Twitter and Facebook are criminally responsible.
@Caleb: This is because the Lamestream media is ultimately run by Homosexuals (male version of a hyper-female) and Rabid Feminists (sickened version of a drab female). This is the social influence engineered by the Ford Foundation, with the blessings of the Rockefellers and Rothschilds.
Neither pseudo-gender group has a clue. They are both just frantic, hysterical, and high on a corrupted form of Estrogen. But once you cross one of them, oh my, they’ll kick and scream, re-write the rules, and pursue you until they can get you when your back is turned.
Perhaps this is why the two-faced Janus rhymes with an*s.
@MajikFireHornet:
Yes, we have a lot of guns here in the US. Millions of them, and I believe I read somewhere that it is something like 2 or 3 for every man, woman and child in the US. There are many gun owners in Pennsylvania for certain, a very “gun rights” conscious state with many thousands licensed to carry a handgun. Now consider the flash mob phenomenon in Philadelphia. Why do you suppose it is that there have been NO incidences of handgun carrying men or women having used their weapons to defend themselves in any of these flash mob attacks? (before you jump to say that none of them probably was licensed I’d like to let you know that the counties surrounding Philly have thousands of licensees). I don’t have the answer to my own question, but I suspect that none of those millions of guns out there will ever be used to fire a shot in anger. Possibly because the thought of the loss of one’s home and savings in the form of lawsuits from the ambulance chasing lawyers that the blacks would employ to sue the pants off of those people with the audacity to defend themselves is a very menacing deterrent. As well as the absolute certainty of jail time, attempted murder (or murder should one of the “youthful black victims of White hatred” be killed) charges would bring. Then there is the certainty of media persecution of the prospective shooter.
WHERE is the English Defense League?!?!?\
WHERE ARE THEY? Why are they not out there busting skulls?
@Curt: I wholeheartedly agree with you Curt. Therefore, the problem (aside from perpetual, Jewish manipulation) is the lack of consistent principles on the part of our race regarding its enslavement to modernity’s paradigm (i.e. an illusory, fiat money system). Would you agree?
@Jules:
Nyeth. The Jewish ‘intellectuals’ made more noises during 2005 riots in Paris in support of then Crypto-Jew interior minister Nicolas Sarkozy. why, because Muslims from Paris ghetto took part in the riots.
Robert Spencer who is fundraising for the pro-Israel Norwegian Christian mass killer – wrote in the Frontpage magazine: “That French officials show no sign, on the eighth day of the Paris riots, of recognizing that this clash of values is the heart of the problem only guarantees that before they will be able to say that their difficulties with their Muslim population are behind them, many more cars will be torched, many more buildings burned, and many more lives destroyed”.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2011/05/11/sarkozy-and-many-faces-of-racism/
It seems to be an impressive display of Politically Correct strength. It’s poison. It sets the standard for public thinking and behavior. With considerable assistance from the Jewish Thought Doctors the authority of Christian morality has waned and PC (cultural Marxism) has replaced it. We are witnessing its raw power as non-white barbarians and Zionist hooligans carry out riots and mayhem across western nations.
I can’t imagine Tony Blair (or incompetent George Bush in the USA) and the Labor Party engaging in such destructive behavior under normal circumstances. Although the Labor Party probably has a number of members other than Englishmen, the new taboo forbids any resistance of white men to non-white immigration. It’s like – you are unworthy of the public trust (and deserve the fires of hell) unless you are willing to clasp the Barbarian to you breast. Media will lynch resisters as a sanctimonious gesture of righteousness.
Political leaders are fully aware of what media can do to them. Being an out cast is nothing to relish. They are constantly vulnerable to media attacks and subsequent public ridicule. You may be tried by the court for some reason, but media and their gullible pigeons are judge and jury. When you are a target you are always guilty. The masses will turn on you and scream for blood. Petty minds are easily convinced that a leader is a scoundrel for cheating on his spouse, or a crook stained by dishonest financial transactions, or, the worse of all, a crazed extremist harboring racial hatred.
Fear and the inability to deal with the power of cultural Marxism is destroying Christendom.
This is off topic but I could use some help on a project I’m working on.
Dr MacDonald has documented how after the Immigration Act of 1924, Jewish organizations in the US began a persistent, unrelenting, wide ranging effort to nullify the act that finally culminated successfully with the passage of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 — a Jewish created and supported law that would not have been passed without this Jewish involvement.
Has there been a similar study of what part Jews played in the opening up of the floodgates of Third World immigration into the United Kingdom following the end of the Second World War? Any help you can give me in providing links to such a study would be appreciated.
Thank you for any help you give me with this.
@thm: I can give you a short answer.
No, there has been no formal study of Jewish involvement in the opening up of the immigration floodgates into the United Kingdom, following WWII.
Documents held and maintained by the old National Front probably constitutes the nearest to what you could call an “official study”. But, the NF has been allowed to whither on the vine since the late 1980s: a slow death encouraged by the feeble leadership offered by Nick Griffin and his rapidly disintegrating British National Party. What has happened to those old documents (from the 1960s and 70s) is anybody’s guess.
One reason for this sorry state of affairs is that Jews in England are so embedded within its elite hierarchy, either through blood (marriage) or through political favours (e.g., House of Lords), that it would be an almost a pointless exercise. It is far easier to simply assume that over 80 percent of the b*stards pushing Third World Immigration into England (and the rest of the U.K.) have been Jewish or half-Jewish.
Meanwhile, England’s Germanic majority are so conditioned to accept this insulting and humiliating serfdom that I must assume the vast majority of those wouldn’t recognize a Jew even while their eye balls are being poked by an Asiatic (Ashkenazi) hooked nose!
Another illustration. Try calling the present, multi-billionaire owner of Chelsea Football Club a ‘Jew’, and see how quickly you are attacked from all sides by ignoramuses who don’t wish to see that ex-Yeltsin-era oligarch exposed for what he is … most likely because for some peculiar reason they like Chelsea’s team the way it has been for at least 5 years: made up of 70 to 80 percent blacks of African origin. The Chelsea and England full-back is the lamestream media’s poster boy for promoting black-boy / white girl miscegenation.
@Addendum to 1:49 pm Comment: When I say 70 to 80 percent blacks of African origin [making up the Chelsea team] what I actually mean is … “of the full senior squad”; which for top English Premier League clubs may number 18 or even 24 players.
@Sophie Miller: Do you have any archaeological evidence to support your claim that the Celts had dark skin “when they first arrived”.
Even better, perhaps you could furnish us with some old, dog-eared photographs from that distant Neolithic age?
Remarkably, I would have to admit to my white skin turning dark(er) whenever I expose my bared self to the sun.
Let me repeat with another example:
Get the word out however you can to Americans. There a very few forums, of course, but if you post comments on every news site that allows it, it can make a difference. We can share links of those and vote them up and add to them.
Also Dr. M, what is the strategy behind the comment changes here? Does it help ad revenue to have to multi click? We understand if that’s it otherwise I don’t.
example from minutes ago on FoxNation:
I’d love to hear from posters here why they choose to sidestep the most important issue of our time. All the problems debated here have one source- the liberal ethnic minority who took over our media decades ago and now runs our government. It makes you feel uneasy, I know, you think of the last drama on their tv network where a skinhead did something to a helpless, hard working minority and you say ‘I’m going to oppose that’. Good for you. That’s why you voted for Obama and agree with most things your friend Oprah and Diane and Katie and Matt say. They are doing their job.
Who speaks for the majority who struggled to create what we had and rolls in their grave while you avoid the
‘uncomfortable’ issue that Henry Ford and Lindbergh tried to warn us about. Oh yeah, they were antisemites, right? Yes, according to every book and tv show written by the tribe they were. What about the majority, majority? Any thing left in that compassionate gullible brain of yours? It’s about a week away from over.
Oh come on, why would they do that? Well it just might keep them on top if they create a group to vote against us since they’re only 2%. That’s what they did. Unions, minorities, immigrants, Comedy Central watchers, SNL watchers, every tv show watcher. Starting to understand?
@Sophie Miller:
Sophie Sophie Sophie. You remind me of my Moron professors who sang the praises of Multi cult while driving home to their all white suburbs.LOL FN pieces of garbage that they are. You’re a joke on so many levels. Multi Cult BS only works if your attempting to inculcate an all white society that is never going to experience Multi-cult. Because as soon as Whites are forced to interact with other races, the sooner we see through the BS of Multi-cult.
-THE SOONER WE FOLLOW THE JAPANESE PARADIGM OF IMMIGRATION THE BETTER. Japanese tourism is awesome but their smart enough to kick the tourists out at the end of the day.
-Get this through your pea brain- people of color hate Multi-cult just as much as Whites. What do you think a Cambodian immigrant thinks when his dad gets shot to death by a Mexican gang member, just because he’s the wrong skin color in LA County? How about a black man who gets his blue collar job taken by Jose, an undocumented worker?! Gee I could keep this up all day. At the end of the day, peoples loyalties are secured for their respective race ONLY and the examples of this are likened to a flood gate with no hinges.
-Unless were talking about FN a**holes like yourself who con whites into self-genocide through miscegenation. Yea your a real hero you FN Monster. Would you go to Japan and argue that they should give up being Japanese for multi cult? Would you-you piece of sh***? You make me sick and the tides are turning.
@Sophie Miller:
And Sophie doll, one more thing. I’ll make a deal with you. As soon as Israel takes down its walls and implements multi-culturalism letting in Asians, Indians, Europeans etc etc in order to practice what it preaches, I’ll back multi-cult 110%. HAHAHA Once again, you’re a joke, your arguments are a joke and multi-cult is a joke… If Israel agrees with me then who are you to disagree?LOL
I wanted to share this intriguing comment made by a Muslim commenter, “Dr. Khan,” in an immigration debate on another blog. I hope you will pardon his English and focus on the spirit and substance of what he writes. I believe it demonstrates that mutual understanding and sympathy is possible with respect to the situation we all find ourselves in:
I agree that there should have been better laws legislated by the developed countries especially Europe regarding Immigration. They should have adopted what the Middle East has been since long ago: No citizenship to foreigners. European countries could’ve done lot more better than ME countries just by allowing People come in for specific period of time in which they could learn a skill and earn enough to go back to their home country.
But unfortunately it didn’t happen, instead what has happened is what are seeing it today. We could develop trade with each other with[out] settling in echother’s countries for good and becoming headache later.
He adds, in a follow-up post:
Anna is absolutely right but with utter hatred the way she discribes Immigrants and more over how intelligent she is saying bad about immigration while claiming herself an American and living in Europe. what a hypocracy. People have moved for thousand of years, still immigrate and will immigate in the future until unless it get massier enough that we wait for anothwer BIG BANG to recreate new universe where no one will know what moving from here to there is a concept.
It is never too late, Europe can stop Immigration, afterall it is there continent they can do whatever they want. But please make enough babies that Europe does not need outsiders to run their machinery for their own survival.
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2011/08/09/barbarians-with-blackberrys/#IDComment182058281
@Sophie Miller:
It’s not about going back to some point in the past. It’s about going forward and deciding what kind of society we want for the future.
The experiment of the past 60 years isn’t working, so it’s time to try something new.
Russia Today channel had Pat Henningsen on relaying his personal experience. As the mayhem outside grew worse, he and a group of patrons barricaded themselves in a pub. The calls to police were met with: ‘We are unable to reach you location. Fend for Yourselves.’
Unsurprisingly, none of the bookstores in the impacted area were said to have been ransacked by raceless ‘rioting youths’. Which is what Afro primitives have miraculously morphed into after passing through Judaic editorial filters.
Let us admit, an Afro with a stolen book is as much of a natural sight as an Easter celebrating Haredi.
@ Bear
Wealthy Americans with local contacts have long leased villas lining the Gulf of Naples coast from the Camorra. Sometimes for as long as the entire summer.
The otherwise nasty and brazen Gypsy gangs were petrified of going anywhere near those properties out of fear they might turn up in some dumpster with their heads sawed off; as in literally.
So oftentimes the Yanks wouldn’t even lock the doors up as there was no need.
@Edgardus de la Vega: In one word, simply; “Yes”, I do agree.
@Curt: Before I continue, I do appreciate your direct responses for the benefit of new readers (especially fellow students). Given the inconsistency of principles severely subordinate to modern materialism (i.e. illusory, financial health): would you agree we whites have allowed ourselves to be spiritually robbed?
@Edgardus de la Vega:
Given the inconsistency of principles severely subordinate to modern materialism (i.e. illusory, financial health)
Not sure what this clause means. Also, is “illusory” intended to qualify “financial health” or is it intended to describe the “principles” (what principles are those) or even something else?
@Sophie Miller:
The bulk of the rioters and looters are Afro-carabeic, the bulk of the areas are Afro-carabeic.
This means that AVERAGE cognitive inequality (ie lower IQ) in these areas will be lower. The evidence for lower cognitive ability is very strong and very consistent. No amount of resources (no child left behind nearly doubled resources), teacher cajoling, teacher scapegoating and harassing; no amount of modified, culturally appropriate schooling has ever closed the gap in at least 60 years, although miracle educational experiments and environmental enrichment programs ,which inevitably disappear again, help sustain the delusions of the faithful.
Associated with the lower IQ is lower impulse control, lower ability to imagine consequences and higher prevalence of psychopathy.
The higher proportion of people of lower cognitive ability means the critical mass required for a breakdown in social order is much closer to the tipping point.
Many of blacks in these areas are certainly good people however many more than in a typical White community are not good people.
Now as to the “White” participants in the looting.
Many of the Whites in these areas are the “White underclass” who could not participate in “White flight” and are likely at the lower end of the cognitive spectrum. There are less low IQ Whites but they are concentrated in these areas alongside the Afro-carabeics.
And additional factor is the deculturation and deracination that has accompanied the succesfull ethno-marxist efforts counter cultural deconstruction. All the talk of institutional racism, white privileged, has worked, all the blame Whitey talk has worked. This breakdown is EXACTLY what countercultutralists talk of achieving.
Whites not longer feel they belong to anything whether it be Christianity or being English.
Afro-carabeics are now steeped in resentment, a ‘religion’ preached to them by ‘progressives’ as well as their own. It is really a result of the frustration at being unable to function intellectually in a modern economy as Whites, Indians, Sihks can. Stoddards ‘revolt against civilisation’ come true.
I as a White racist will never commit a crime: not against my White brethren, who I would die for as I would for my children. Nor will I ever commit a crime against another race out of the pride of not embarrassing my own race and simply out of conscience and respect for the other ethnie or individual. Neither Whites nor White racialists are haters despite the rhetoric of Searchlight/SPLC/HopeNotHate etc.
Globalisation ideology has similarly to ethno-marxism disconnected many Whites from any sense of community; in particular this applies not only to the White underclass but to also to elites with either left or right orientation. Blair didn’t care about the working class British when he piled more immigrants on top of them.
It is no longer worth investing oneself in anything. There is no sense of pride that makes it seem worth investing any further, no sense of stewardship. Mutual obligation is an abstraction not a sensibility anchored in spirit and or blood.
Supposedly people like you are investing in the ideology of multiculturalism as a substitute for religion. It is your ideal, your Kingdom of God, your 2nd coming.. It doesn’t work in reality as the Flash mobs, riots, looting, subway bombings show. It’s as ridiculous and unreal as a pink she elephant goddess.
It is no surprise that a community compartmentalised and divided by diversity, dragged down in sections by low cognitive ability should be the first to breakdown. It is no surprise that a society de-constructed by an endless war on Western values and religion should then show no values but the culture of resentment and disenfranchisement around which it was reconstructed.
@Bear:
That was a fascinating read, Bear. Do you have a number of concrete examples of counterculturalists actually talking about achieving a “breakdown”?
Separately, I would be interested in some elaboration on this idea that it isn’t worth investing. You expressed it here:
It is no longer worth investing oneself in anything. There is no sense of pride that makes it seem worth investing any further, no sense of stewardship. Mutual obligation is an abstraction not a sensibility anchored in spirit and or blood.
@Whiteawake: How many Blacks lost their lives, properties and lands during White colonization of African continent?
Oh! I forgot, the Western Whites being the followers of the ‘meek’ Jesus never harm anyone, right!
Cameron: ‘Britain is a ‘sick society’
http://rehmat2.wordpress.com/2011/08/11/cameron-britain-is-a-sick-society/
Bear, no one, white or otherwise, has asked you to die for him.
Hopefully you are under supervision somewhere but wherever you are, take a step back, take a breath, just chill.
@Edgardus de la Vega:
I have to agree with Anon 2 :
“Given the inconsistency of principles severely subordinate to modern materialism (i.e. illusory, financial health): would you agree we whites have allowed ourselves to be spiritually robbed?”
The meaning of your statement is nebulous (at least to me). Spiritually robbed? An individual who has faith or a faith of some kind cannot be robbed of it. He or she may lose heart and give up in a spiritual sense, but “robbery”? Now if you are talking about robbery of the material kind, then I can agree with you whole heartedly. We have lost our industry, our incomes, our rights, our government and we were truly robbed of those things (but the crafty crew that managed this did so over a period of some 1oo years or so (in the US), working very patiently and slowly toward their goal, and always with the help of those among us who have no conscience, no morals and no loyalty to their own people. In a certain sense, the “spirituality” of the nation was subverted, damaged severely by the miseducation system and Jewtube influence (removal of prayer from schools, the teaching of “alternate sexual lifestyles”, the ridicule directed at Christianity, etc), perhaps this is what you refer to?
@Anglo Saxon: Read Julius Caesar who describes the Celts as Dark Skinned, and he was from Italy, so he wasn’t just talking about a good tan.
@Enigmatic: -Get this through your pea brain- people of color hate Multi-cult just as much as Whites.
Not seen any evidence of either whites or or other skin colours (theres only one race, ask a biologist) particularly having problems with multiculturalism at present now the idea has been integrated into cpopular culture, only a small reactionary minority.
What do you think a Cambodian immigrant thinks when his dad gets shot to death by a Mexican gang member, just because he’s the wrong skin color in LA County?
Er that a moron shot his dad i would think.
How about a black man who gets his blue collar job taken by Jose, an undocumented worker?!
Er, cheap labour is a bad thing.
Gee I could keep this up all day.
Not got anything better to do then.
At the end of the day, peoples loyalties are secured for their respective race ONLY
Hogwash if the devil asks me to choose between hitler and Ghandi I know who’s in the fire, and he was white.
-Unless were talking about FN a**holes like yourself who con whites into self-genocide through miscegenation.
What colour is your hair? Blond, Black, Red, if hair colour makes no difference why should skin colour.
Yea your a real hero you FN Monster. Would you go to Japan and argue that they should give up being Japanese for multi cult?
Er why would I do that?
Where is it written in multiculturalism that any particular culture should give up it’s identity?
Would you-you piece of sh***? You make me sick and the tides are turning
Oh wheres that happening then? I rather thought Mr Breivik had somewhat consolodated the position of Multiculturalism.
King Canute springs to mind.
@Enigmatic: Personally I think there are major issues to be considered concerning any state founded on a theology, Israel is problematic in that regard. A state founded on guilt over a failure to protect, was not a good beginning.
But the problem exists, and the only viable solution is full integration of both Israeli and Palestinian populations.
A lot of bad blood so it could take time, but in the end it is the only solution which will work.
@Alex Kurtagic: It’s always going on to the future, but those who forget the mistakes of the past are destined to repeat them.
Where is the evidence the Multiculturalism isn’t working?
My Iranian (Athiest)friend is doing very well thankyou as are my Pakistani Imigrant Family (Devout Muslims) and My Daoist Tai Chi teacher, we argue all the time, but never fall out.
I even have Christian friends, but they will keep trying to convert me which is a bit annoying. I like my Polish Bus driver, And the Bangladeshi take away makes a Rogan Josh, I can’t match.
Where’s the problem? Seems to be working fine to me.
@Bear: Short answer
Neo-eugenic hogwash. Long answer to follow.
@Sophie Miller:
I think the picture of the woman with her binoculars looking at the sky is highly symbolical of the mentality of her kind of people.What is she looking at or hoping to find in the clouds?Utopia?The multicultural paradise ready to descend on earth?Is she so much hypnotized by her delusion that she refuses to see the facts on the ground?
@Sophie Miller:
The absolute majority of the rioters is evidently black.There is indeed a small number of whites involved.Of course the (Jewish owned) press concentrates on them to give a wrong impression of the racial reality of it all. These whites are the lowest of the lowest.Many of them are what in America is called “whiggers” (from: white niggers) that is whites who find negroes “cool” and try to imitate them in hairstyle,dress,speech and behaviour.This is probably what your multicultural ideal is all about: together we are strong, together we destroy!
@Anglo Saxon: You touch upon a matter I have long wondered about. Do you know what the numbers and/or percentages are of Jews (self-identified or otherwise) in the Lords and Commons? I can’t myself say offhand what the figures for the U.S. Congress are, but I do know that Jews are represented far out of proportion to their presumed 2 percent of the population. We all are aware, sad to say, that they are fully a third of the justices on the Supreme Court.
What is it that Whites feel inside that let them submit to this? What manner of guilt could drive a person to allow the sacrifice of their own children as recompense? How could a parent feel it is moral to offer up their own children as human sacrifice for some supposed sin of the past? This is sickness.
@Rehmat:
Rehmat,you are incorrigible!Here we go again:
How many Whites lost their lives,properties and lands during Muslim colonization of Spain and the Balkans?
Oh!I forgot,the Eastern Browns being the followers of the aggressive Mohammed always harm everyone,right!
@Sophie Miller: Ever heard of body paint? Body hair would have also made the original Celts appear far darker than they actually were. Intellectually, you are coming up short ‘Sophie’, or whatever your real name is.
Be candid. Either you are a faggot with a permanent erection posing as both a ‘female’ and pseudo-intellectual, or a Jewess coming here to spill her arrogant, rancid bile.
Which is it?
@Sophie Miller: “Where is the evidence the Multiculturalism isn’t working?”
If the goal of “multiculturalism” is to replace people like me, it is working fine.
@Curt: I’m generally aware of those issues and they obviously matter. However — let’s avoid detailed answers. Let me rephrase the question: since you said ‘yes’ to the fact (based on the previous question) that we as a people are lacking consistent principles as a necessary buffer against materialism: have we as a whole race allowed ourselves to be spiritually robbed?
My premise: we are ailing from something basic going way back in time. I’m simply attempting to more-or-less find out a probable root cause.
@Bear: “The bulk of the rioters and looters are Afro-carabeic, the bulk of the areas are Afro-carabeic.”
False: the bulk of the rioters across the UK are white.
It is only in London that the there is anything close to a Black majority involvement.
Where there is about 40% African Caribbean 40% White and about 20% Asian representation in the numbers. Elsewhere it is 70 to 80% white gangs.
“This means that AVERAGE cognitive inequality (ie lower IQ)”
The only uses for an IQ test is to make a very generalised estimate of someone’s intelligence, according to the guy who invented them in the first place who’s name was Cattell, and possibly to determine how likely someone’s parents are to drive a Volovo.
“in these areas will be lower. The evidence for lower cognitive ability is very strong and very consistent.”
Which would be fine if there was any academic agreement as to:
a) a definition for intelligence, and therefore IQ: which there isn’t.
b) a reliable non-culturally specific IQ test, agreed within academia: which there isn’t.
c) The genetic influence on IQ, research on which has been plagued by outright fraud, e.g. Cyril Burt.
“No amount of resources (no child left behind nearly doubled resources), teacher cajoling, teacher scapegoating and harassing; no amount of modified, culturally appropriate schooling has ever closed the gap in at least 60 years, although miracle educational experiments and environmental enrichment programs ,which inevitably disappear again, help sustain the delusions of the faithful.”
Yet educational achievement among African Caribbean Children increased 300% between 1989 and 2004, according to the office of national statistics.
“Associated with the lower IQ is lower impulse control, lower ability to imagine consequences and higher prevalence of psychopathy.”
So if this were true, in theory, the most violent and dangerous people in society would be those with a learning disability, which is not supported by evidence. The theory is therefore invalid.
This is also another area where you imply academic agreement where there is none. There are plenty of arguments about the influence of culturally specific assessment and interpretation concerning Ethnicity and mental health. For instance what is the significance of differing intensity of eye contact within different cultures, and how does this influence ‘diagnosis’ of mental health conditions where none exist?
In addition to this IQ is increasingly seen as having a low correlation with impulse control withj EQ being a far better measure for this, and of life success. E.g. children showing the symptoms of Aspergers syndrome, usually score high on IQ but low on EQ, and are usually seen as ‘underachievers’ based on IQ measurement alone.
“The higher proportion of people of lower cognitive ability means the critical mass required for a breakdown in social order is much closer to the tipping point.”
Unsupportable, it is just as valid to argue that a higher proportion of people of lower cognitive ability means that questions are not asked and conformity to consensus ideals is more likely therefore social breakdown is less likely.
Subsequently it is equally valid to argue that disorder is a function of higher intelligence.
“Many of blacks in these areas are certainly good people however many more than in a typical White community are not good people.”
Hmm Mps are predominantly White, yet they showed a remarkable proposity to fiddle their expenses.
“Now as to the “White” participants in the looting.
Many of the Whites in these areas are the “White underclass” who could not participate in “White flight” and are likely at the lower end of the cognitive spectrum. “
Equally unsupportable, particularly in the context of most rioters around the country as a whole being white. You also misrepresent ideas about an ‘underclass’ which according to the author who coined the term, Michael Young, (in 1958 in a essay entitled The rise of the meritocracy, 1870-2033: An essay on education and inequality. London: Thames & Hudson.) the underclass are those who are excluded based on the flawed concept of a Meritocracy, and as such are no more nor less intelligent than the ‘overclass’, simply excluded from mainstream society.
“There are less low IQ Whites but they are concentrated in these areas alongside the Afro-carabeics.”
Which is just another way of saying that those who are excluded from mainstream society in a meritocracy are clustered in ghettos, again there is no demonstrable association with intelligence. This is simply an argument for dispersing social housing into more affluent neighbourhoods.
“And additional factor is the deculturation”
What a daft word, presumably an objection to England’s national dish being curry rather than roast beef.
“and deracination.”
And another daft word. Although the precise figure has fluctuated a little over the centuries, the ethnic mix of the UK is not wildly dissimilar to the ethnic mix during the Roman occupation. About 5% non native population, far eastern populations were poorly represented in roman times but Africans have always been a part of British Culture. Despite its demonstrable flaws (Emperors, bread and circuses) the roman empire was remarkably multicultural.
“that has accompanied the succesfull ethno-marxist efforts counter cultural deconstruction.”
What cultural destruction? Where? Provide an example. In terms of the declining influence of Christianity it might be more productive to look at Tom Paine (English, cum American revolutionary) and his influential pamphlet the ‘Age of Reason’ which was really the last nail in the coffin of the cultural significance of Christianity and the true birth of the secular society.
The above is little more than gobbledygook,
“All the talk of institutional racism, white privileged, has worked, all the blame Whitey talk has worked. This breakdown is EXACTLY what countercultutralists talk of achieving.
Whites not longer feel they belong to anything whether it be Christianity or being English. “
Christianities, horrible history as the most bloodthirsty religion in history, is mostly to blame for it’s demise, and you mistake feelings of guilt concerning empire among the English for an external pressure. Despite its undoubted power most people realise empire was a moral disaster, and since this was closely associated with Englishness, it has called into question what an ‘English’ identity actually is? Turns out we never really knew.
“Afro-carabeics are now steeped in resentment, a ‘religion’ preached to them by ‘progressives’ as well as their own. “
Or do you just underestimate the cultural tenacity of experiences such as slavery? 60 years on and Israel has barely scratched the surface of processing the experience of the Holocaust, we are barely 150 years beyond the de jure abolition of slavery, and less than 50 from it’s de-facto abolition in the US, though the current US prison population has been argued to be a re-institution of the practice by the back door. Could we expect different? I think not.
“It is really a result of the frustration at being unable to function intellectually in a modern economy as Whites, Indians, Sihks can. Stoddards ‘revolt against civilisation’ come true.”
Which is a flawed conclusion based on a flawed assumption. It is equally reasonable to argue that systemic racism excludes them. Personally I think that there is less of an issue than you imagine, that the re-integration of a once ‘slave’ population into the mainstream is incomplete is not to say that it has not progressed, significantly. What is required for completion is dispersal of ghettos within the general population, I would extend this to all disadvantaged communities.
“I as a White racist will never commit a crime: not against my White brethren, who I would die for as I would for my children. Nor will I ever commit a crime against another race out of the pride of not embarrassing my own race and simply out of conscience and respect for the other ethnie or individual. Neither Whites nor White racialists are haters despite the rhetoric of Searchlight/SPLC/HopeNotHate etc.”
Oh dear and you think that kind of thinking has any hope of flying any better in the UK than it did in either America, ‘Separate but equal’, or South Africa, ‘Apartheid’. The inability to tolerate diversity and the desire to be separate are sufficient evidence of hate.
“Globalisation ideology”
Ah that great invention of the British Empire.
“has similarly to ethno-marxism disconnected many Whites from any sense of community; “
I think this is particularly overplayed, if there is a dissolution of community it is probably far more to do with watching too much TV and not enough doing something in community settings than anything else.
“in particular this applies not only to the White underclass but to also to elites with either left or right orientation.”
The majority of the ‘white’ people I know have a pretty good sense of community, one which rejects the mistakes of the past and looks to a better future.
“Blair didn’t care about the working class British when he piled more immigrants on top of them.”
Not sure what Blair ever cared about, other than his own position?
Equally I am not sure there is a British Working class any more, mostly because those that seem to claim that identity seem nothing like the British Working class identity that certainly existed when I was a child, which was very much a case of the ‘Union man.’ Union membership has fallen off markedly in recent years. Immigration certainly didn’t seem to bother my fathers generation, (Why else would Alf Garnett have been such a cult figure, lifting the culturally paranoid up for ridicule) I don’t see why it should bother this generation.
“It is no longer worth investing oneself in anything. There is no sense of pride that makes it seem worth investing any further, no sense of stewardship.”
Isn’t there? Or is it just that people invest in a more diverse variety of things, that pride is associated more strongly with morality and working for the common good, than it is in outmoded views of national identity? Is stewardship more wrapped up with the planet and the landscape than it is with a fantasy version of heritage, which usually portrays a history that never existed in the first place? The pomp and circumstance of Empire, has simply been peeled away to reveal concentration camps in South Africa, and manufactured famine in places as far apart as Ireland and India.
“Mutual obligation is an abstraction not a sensibility anchored in spirit and or blood.”
When has it been anything other than this?
“Supposedly people like you are investing in the ideology of multiculturalism as a substitute for religion.”
What a curious idea, sounds somewhat similar to the creationist idea that Science is just as much a religion as Christianity Daoism or Islam. Yet it is science which has the courage to say ‘we don’t know’ whereas religion is determined to say we do know.
Personally I have no intention of substituting anything for religion, which is possibly one of the most destructive forces in the history of the human race. Multiculturalism works because it is based in real science, ie, it proposes a hypothesis, which stands until refuted by evidence, after which it reformulates a new hypothesis, accommodating the newly discovered evidence. The supposed confusion about the causes of these riots is based more on the form they took than the underlying dynamics, the basic causes are the same as always, poverty alienation ect, the form was a targeting of material goods, which in the end is just a reflection of the values of the society in which they took place.
If there is a sickness in parts of UK society it is the overemphasis on the value of material possessions, than it is ‘psychosis’ in given populations. This is an attribution error, where the ‘psychosis’ of a crowd is seen as the ‘psychosis’ of a community, All crowds are ‘psychotic’, what the ‘psychosis’ targets is far more illuminating than association it with anything other than a crowd mentality.
“It is your ideal, your Kingdom of God, your 2nd coming.. It doesn’t work in reality as the Flash mobs, riots, looting, subway bombings show.”
You have yet to show an association between, “Flash mobs, riots, looting, subway bombings” and multiculturalism, rather it is more evident that these things have failed to remotely dent multiculturalism, and rather have served to strengthen its progression and development as a central moral ideal in modern western society.
“It’s as ridiculous and unreal as a pink she elephant goddess.”
Which is no more ridiculous than some guy nailed to a lump of wood. And less gruesome.
“It is no surprise that a community compartmentalised and divided by diversity, dragged down in sections by low cognitive ability should be the first to breakdown.“
A statement not borne out in practice, troublesome areas in the UK are more closely associated with economic deprivation than any other single factor.
“It is no surprise that a society de-constructed by an endless war on Western values”
Hmm, raises the questions: What are ‘Western Values’? Can they be shown to be radically different from the values of other cultures? And if a difference can be identified can they be shown to be better? Quite apart from identifying that they have been ‘de-constructed’ and if so whether or not this is a good or bad thing? And if it is a ‘war’, or rather a reformulation into something better? Or is it just something that has been evolving anyway?
“and religion”
Now by ‘religion’ are we discussing systems of social control based in ritual, and a sense of ‘absolute truth’, or are we discussing ’spirituality’, and ‘spiritual communities‘? Personally I can see a place for ’spirituality’, and ‘spiritual communities, which currently seem stronger than at any time in history, ‘Organised religion’ however, is possibly the most destructive force humanity has ever created, even when it masquerades as a political ideology, such as Nazism, and perhaps especially. And seems to be in a fundamental decline.
“should then show no values but the culture of resentment and disenfranchisement around which it was reconstructed.”
Or perhaps it is not a matter of ‘no values’ rather a case that values mores and morals are under reconstruction, re-evaluation and reformulation. You imply a process is complete where it is more truthful to say it has only just begun. You imply a reconstruction has taken place, when the deconstruction is not complete, and will not be complete for possibly hundreds of years.
We have realised Empire was wrong, yet for decades the British have deluded ourselves that we gave more than we took. We have imagined empire was a result of some intrinsic power, rather than an accident that grew out of the fortunate geographical position of Britain. A damp little island that just happened to have one of the best crop growing climates on the planet, that gave rise to the Agricultural revolution, which kick started the Industrial revolution and gave us an economic head start on the rest of the planet. They seem to have caught up.
If Britain is truly a great nation, it will be in the next hundred years that we find out. It will be how this nation responds to the challenges of globalisation and multiculturalism, which are now irresistible forces that determine our true place in history. If we get it right and integrate with each other effectively new will be remembered as great, if we don’t we will just end up as a footnote to WWII. Fantasising that there is some golden age we can return to is not only a backwards and regressive step, it’s delusional.
@Franklin Ryckaert: Or are you just projecting?
How about pinpointing some facts, careful now there as slippery as eels.
@Franklin Ryckaert: Fully reliable figures will not be available for some time, and will inevitably be mostly based on arrests and prosecutions.
however an opportunity led sample of images available suggests, in Manchester 80% of rioters where white, in Birmingham about 70% were white. In London there were about 40% Black, 40% white and about 20% Asian.
@Armor: How are you being replaced?
@Anglo Saxon: So Josephus is wrong too presumably, since he also describes them as Dark Skinned, as does Tacitus. They must have been pretty dark to begin with since they had been in britain the best part of 1000 years by that point.
The simple answer to the rest of your comment is to ask how is my identity whatever it is (Middle class white Mother, lapsed united reformed, now athiest/agnostic)relevant to the validity, quality or value of the argument offered?
@Sophie Miller:
And here’s my simple answer.
It’s your haughty, know-it-all, win-at-all-costs attitude.
Clearly, you harbour a visceral contempt for almost everyone else posting here, as you have appeared out of nowhere, wafting your faux intellectual ‘superiority’ in order to ignite arguments with several other TOO regulars … and all at the same time.
We have witnessed your kind here (and elsewhere) before.
Maybe you just need your fat bottom smacked.
@Sophie Miller: I thought Britons were called dark skinned simply because of the incredible amount of tattoos they wore. The Picts’ name was an insult by the Romans (I think the English word picture has the same root) and referred to their skins being painted all over.
Recent genetic studies seem to support the view that for the most part Britons (including the Irish) are native inhabitants of the isles. It seems there were two waves of settlement, the first one right after the glaciation (and they mostly settled the shores), and the second, smaller one (settling the inside of the isles) as agriculture spread. The majority of the gene pool (over 50% in England, much more in the rest) comes from these original settlements. The rest of the gene pool comes mostly not from the Celtic invasion (which seems to be a cultural or political, rather than a populational development), neither from the Roman conquest (which had minuscule long-term population effects), but rather from the Anglo-Saxon and Danish/Viking invasions. Apparently the Norman invasion also had negligible effects.
@Gabor: I concur Gabor. Congrats on a good quality post, as it is factually accurate.
@Anglo Saxon: And there was me thinking that I was offering an alternative view point.
It’s all very well offering up points of view but how valid are they if they are not subject to evaluation and critique from an alternative perspective.
Or are you arguing that what is posted here is only intended to elicit agreement from others.
I will say that this is so far the first of the anti-multicultural articles I have posted to over the last six months that has not deleted my contribution imediately, so that is to it’s credit at least.
@Sophie Miller: What I am telling you is that you have arrived here to deliberately seek confrontation, and are doubtless being provocative for simply perverse, and egotistic reasons.
If you want to pretend your behaviour promotes ‘civilized debate’ then you’d better open up and tell us what crappy school you attended. Knowing that would save us the task of revising our dusty knowledge of psychiatry.
My original hunch remains; that you are a male in drag.
@Gabor: I have only ever seen that as a revisionist argument, Caesar certainly describes them as Dark skinned and tattooed, so most scolars dissmiss the idea.
Geneticaly Britons are predominantly descended from a racial group that migrated out of northern India 12,000 years ago arriving in Europe about 5000bce, they were resident in Britain at about 1500bce. Consensus is that this group were the Celts. The genetic link of Britons is to this group, integration of Norse Saxon and Norman (Norse immigrants to France) cultures appearing to have had only a minor impact of the genetic make up of Britons.
The Picts, was indeed an insult propogated by the Romans, but was directly related to the Racial group already living in Briton when the Celts arived, the genetic information suggests that the code associated with the Picts persisted in the Highleands of scotland, but was significantly diluted in the late 18th and throughout the 19th and 20th centuries.
there were certainly two main stages of migration post glacial and late bronse age, though there is dispute about how closely related the two groups might be considered. The first group is thought to possibly to have come from Doggerland, escaping as it flooded, and some belive that they were descended from a group that migrated out of northern India between 5 and 10,000 years earlier, than the later group, and that the earlier group represent the picts.
@Sophie Miller: From India? How did they cover the enormous distance? Without airplanes, trucks, buses, cars, railroads, roads, or even carts, horses, or any other animals?
As far as I know, those original settlers came from Southern Europe (mostly from present-day Spain), which was the only inhabited part of Europe during the glaciations. The people in the Celtic period (including the Picts, who probably also spoke a Celtic dialect, probably closely related to Old Welsh) were mostly descended from these original settlers. (Plus the second wave of settlement during the spread of agriculture.)
The Anglo-Saxon and Danish/Viking conquests did have large-scale effects, apparently the present day (I mean, 1950) population of England is almost 50% descended from them. However, they are more than 50% (and an even much larger proportion everywhere else in the isles) descended from the Celts (or whatever you call the original inhabitants who by the time of the Roman conquest spoke various Celtic vernaculars).
@Anglo Saxon: Oh so disagreement is confrontation and provocation, by your argument here we might conclude that the original post was intended to provoke. Either both are true or neither.
For my part I am offering an alternative opinion, or is only agreement acceptable discourse from your point of view. Or is it that tolerating diverse perspectives is a problem?
Again how does my ‘school’ bare any relevance to the argument offered, either the points are valid, or offer a rebuttal.
If I were a 19 stone rugby player in a tutu red suspenders, with slingbacks and a pink basque, how would that influence the validity of the argument offered?
@Sophie Miller: I just looked through your early comments, and found the following: “Get this through your pea brain”
I think that is provocative, especially since you might be aware that – to put it mildly – your point of view is deeply resented on this site. If your aim is to turn any one of us over to the multikulti side (maybe the least committed, or the least committed readers), than your’s is a poor strategy indeed. But if you are just looking for confrontation, then insulting the commenters works really fine.
@Gabor: Well I might suggest that reading more thouroughly would reveal that the ‘pea brain’ comment was directed at me by Enigmatic I merely cited it, in my response.
Certainly I would be keen to encourage those who are undecided to consider the points I make. I would also encourage those who feel more certain, to consider they may be travelling a wrong road, how is this wrong?
I’m afraid I don’t see resentment as an issue, truth is truth, whether it is resented or not. Though it does raise the question about what there is to resent? Why resent a differing opinion? Unless you feel insecure in the validity of your own point of view. Surely if an opinion has validity, it is possible to support it with evidence and argument?
Criticising the presentation of a view, and an argument offered, simply on the basis it has been presented, doesn’t seem to address very much.
What is it about the opinion and argument you resent?
@Sophie Miller: I’m sorry, I didn’t spend too much time looking through your comments.
@Sophie Miller:
Sophie, really loved your hypocritical rants based on subjective opinion while blaming others for using facts when they’re as “slippery as eels.” Sounds like someone believes in her own obectivity! wOw lol “dark skinned Europeans.” I guess your detractors are subjective while your objective. Oh my, how does that happen!?
FORGET THE BACK AND FORTH, THE BOTTOMLINE IS:
-Your arguments have nothing to do with mutli-culturalism but more with your racist, anti-white attitude as you completely negate the experiences of white posters on this site.
-Sophie why don’t you care about the white people on this site? Why do you turn you back on the victims of a failed theory that was ultimately supposed to benefit ONE group at the expense of ALL other groups?
-I believe your stance to be the acts of an anti-human monster embodied by a lady sporting binoculars who refuses to see the world through the lens of the VICTIMS of multi-cult. Say it aint so.
-Tell the white posters on this site that their experiences are valid and that you care about the senseless murder and hatred tied to this failed theory. Exactly.
-Like I said you’re a joke, a hypocritical anti-white joke at that. Kick rocks you racist bit**.
@Gabor: They walked, at quite a leasurly pace, ariving in europe about 6,000 years after they left northern India. At about the same time as first large towns were emerging in the fertile cresent, and the Bosphorous breached creating the Black sea.
The issue of horses and carts I’d have to look up, but I’d suspect they may well have been in use. After all the evidence suggests that it was only a thousand years later that the egyptians started using cocaine and tobbacco, so anchient culture was probably a lot more mobile than we have so far understood.
http://www.faculty.ucr.edu/~legneref/ethnic/mummy.htm
@Sophie Miller:
Maybe KMAC should keep your around, you’ve really rallied the troops! KUDOS SOPHIE! hahahaha It is fun to have the full lunacy of multi-cult apologists like Sophie displayed for all to see. Keep up the good work girl!!
@Sophie Miller:
Because it’s all of the below:
- wrong
- dangerous (for those who believe it and for the rest of the European race)
- spread by government and establishment propaganda and big money is behind it
- for the most part hypocritical
- insensitive to the plight of its victims, and in the same time claiming the moral high ground
- the proponents of this view are totally intolerant of any other opinion, e.g. they see no problem that a Bundesbank director or a fashion designer can lose his (totally unrelated) job for his opinion, in fact, they think these bastards should be taught a lesson
- plus some other reasons I forgot to mention
@Sophie Miller:
“Why resent a differing opinion?”
Good question Sophie. Why don’t we ask academia why they’ve resented and purged those opinions deconstructing a marxist anti-white paradigm for the last 50 years?
@Sophie Miller:
A point of view could be and indeed is resented by people, and it’s totally unrelated to whether one is sure or not in his own opinion. E.g. the view that an ethnic group should be exterminated can be deeply resented even if you are totally sure in your opinion.
@Enigmatic: I think I would interpret “believes in her own obectivity!” as a projection. Rather I think I would argue that I am aware of my subjectivity, and offer an as objecive perspective in that light as is practicable.
How have I negated the experiences of posters on this site, consider that narratives can be interpreted in a number of ways. Prehaps I am recieving a message of percieved alienation, but which I see strong evidence of becoming attached to an outdated meme about ethnicity, which there is strong evidence to suggest is self destructive. In that context I am here to help.
Your interpretation of’helping one group at the expense of all others’ seems flawed, since I would interpret this as the aid of one group to the benefit of all.
I would say that I saw the world through those eyes many years ago and that the experience isn’t in question, rather the interpretation and the narrative constructed about that experience which is flawed.
I can see no senseless murder or hatred related to the multiculturalist agenda.
I can see senseless hatred and Murder, but that this is rather associated with the vagueries of life. That this is interpreted as a result of the multicultualist agenda rather denies the reality of the emotional pain of loss than acknowleges it. As such I would argue that I am representing the true interests and experiences of people posting on this site rather than those who would overlay an agenda of race on experience.
Grief and loss whether for a loved one or for a ‘way of life’ even if it never existed as we would like to remember it, is painful, we would all like someone to blame for that pain, the reality is it doesn’t matter who or what we blame, the pain doesn’t go away. Far better to experience the pain, grieve for the loss and move on.
Without multiculturalism, there would have been far more pain and loss, and a good chance that the world would have slipped into a new dark age.
You offer up an argument that I am racist against white people, where is your evidence for this? Or is this just a interpretation which confirms pre-concieved ideas you already hold?
@Enigmatic: Have they resented it, or have they deconstructed it and found it logically wanting.
@Sophie Miller: They do resent it. For example they call for immediate ostracism of anybody expressing those opinions.
Let’s just take the example of professor MacDonald, who was ostracized and vilified for his works, not the least in the mainstream media, by people – like professor Pinker – who have acknowledged never to have read those works. Why such hatred if that is just a simple deconstructable and logically wanting opinion? Why not write a scholarly refutation?
@Gabor: But it does not relate to the argument, the resentment is irellevant, what is relevant is if there is a logically sound argument, with good supporting evidence, based on a sound moral premise.
Deconstruction of the argument, the evidence and the moral premise are sound aproaches. Dismissing an argument because it is resented is not sound. I resent taxes, but I can see the purpose of them, how is my resentlment relevant to an argument as to their necessity.
@Sophie Miller: I didn’t say your arguments were wrong because I resent them. But nevertheless I resent these opinions (which, by the way, were hold a few years ago by me as well).
However, it would be nice if you answered my questions regarding how those supposedly dark-skinned Britons travelled from North India to the British Isles without help from airplanes, railroads, etc., and without people much closer to their destination reaching and settling it well before them. It would be nice to know the answer to that!
@Gabor: Macdonald was sidelined because his ideas make no sense. Giving his work equivalent weight to that of others is akin to demanding that for every professor of evolution there should be a paralell professor of creationism.
@Sophie Miller:
What do you perceive in MacDonald’s ideas that doesn’t make sense?
@Sophie Miller: I’m sure if a leading evolutionary biologist (or indeed, any leading biologist) would come out as a creationist, many evolutionary biologists would take their time at the very least to read his work. Even more so, if a small number of qualified scholars would actually endorse at least some of his work. Moreover, many evolutionary biologists have wasted a lot of their precious time to refute anti-Darwinist arguments put forward by totally unqualified people. (You may not be aware, but most ID proponents and creationists totally lack any biological education whatsoever.)
However, without even reading the work they cannot even know if his ideas are simply repetitions of old and long refuted anti-Semitic arguments or if they are something new, or a combination of the two, or whatever. I totally agree with Dr. Salter on that.
@Anon2: She obviously haven’t read anything from him, except his blog posts.
@Gabor: hasn’t
At least I doubt she has.
@Sophie Miller:
Sophie you were sidelined because your arguments make no sense.
Sophie states:
“Giving his work equivalent weight to that of others is akin to demanding that for every professor of evolution there should be a paralell professor of creationism.”
WAIT, are you actually arguing that the theory of evolution is objective fact and therefore all other theories are invalid?? LMAO!! There you go believing your own koolaid and objectivity while highlighting the “subjectivity” of your opponents. Good one genius.
-Lets be honest, your a critic and therefore deem all evidence contrary to your opinion as “invalid.” I, likewise, am a critic that deems your evidence as “invalid.”
- So at this point you should follow the group promoting your opinion and I will do the same. Which begs the question: Why are you on this website?
@Anon2: MacDonalds ideas are based on a false premise: no matter how elegant the logic that proceeds from that, the conclusions will be false no matter what.
@Gabor: Thought I had done that.
They walked a bit settled a bit walked a bit more until they got there. about 6,000 years later.
other people were in between and did settle, but were for the mostpart not so numerous as the Celts, therefore the genettic history suggests very strongly that they simply outperformed those who were there initially.
@Sophie miller: My source for the genetic history of the British isles is Bryan Sykes. What is your source regarding the North Indian presence in Britain? I’m curious because the whole area between Britain and North India was inhabited, and as soon as the glaciation ended, the population moved north from Southern Europe. So the question remains, how on Earth did they get there?
@Sophie Miller: His works are based on mainstream sources. What is the false premise that he is making?
@Sophie Miller:
Yawn… Sophie you have to realize that this site exists solely due to the failure of your logic and those promoting it.
-This site is a reaction to the failures of multi-culturalism.
-The sooner you realize this the happier you will be and the less time you will spend arguing to yourself on this site.
-I just can’t understand how someone like yourself can believe mutli-cult dogma so ruthlessely??? Why your just as bad as those crazy Muslims and Christians believing in their invisible God!! haha
-If you need dogma so bad, as evidenced by your posts, why not turn religious?LOL
@Gabor: I checked at least some of his sources, because one needs to be a bit cautious regarding a scholar whose works are not mainstream. I couldn’t find any obvious distortions on his part. So it would be high time Pinker & co. started a scholarly criticism of MacDonald’s work, because he got an innocent layperson like yours truly converted. As a layperson, I cannot have the time to check all his sources, and I’m not qualified to find errors in his thinking (I couldn’t find any obvious logical or factual errors in it), so I could only rely on his critics. Who are doing only not too scholarly attacks with the atmosphere of an Inquisition auto-da-fé. Now that’s not enough to convince me.
@Gabor:
Gabor why subject yourself to her requests when she has zero sincerity for an honest exchanges of ideas?
-Sophie represents the dogmatic blindness of Multi-culturalism and therefore anyone attempting to highlight counter-arguments against her chosen “faith” will be met with a closed mind and open hostility.
-Sophie should be met with ridicule and contempt in the same fashion that Rachael Maddow labeled tea-partiers as “tea baggers.” Isn’t that right Sophie?? hahaha Right out of the Saul Alinsky playbook baby.
@Gabor:
Chicki, L; Nichols, RA; Barbujani, G; Beaumont, MA. (2002) Y genetic data support the Neolithic demic diffusion model. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 99(17):
J. M. Coles/A. F. Harding, (1979) The Bronze Age in Europe London 1979
Drews. R (1993) “The End of the Bronze Age: Changes in Warfare and the Catastrophe Ca. 1200 B.C.” Princeton University Press
Research on Indo-european languages of which Breton, Gallic, and Welsh are members makes a clear connection with the languages of Nortern india/central asia.
Mitocondrial DNA identifies a track of first Migration into southern Europe circa 45,000 BCE a second wave into northern Europe, circa 25,000 BCE, tthe association in the indoeuropean languages indicates a linguistic break circa 12,000BCE.
The archeological evidence indicates an evolving culture across Asia and Europe, Coles and Harding.
Do you want me to get into how the Arians and Norwegians are descended from the same group
@Sophie Miller:
“those who forget the mistakes of the past are destined to repeat them.”
Hence, the need now for something new.
@Gabor: His false premise is that you can make any assumptions whatever about any given culture, without concrete empirical evidence of which he presents precisely none.
@Enigmatic: Based on what has so far been presented as rebuttal, this site exists because of the success of multiculturalism.
@Enigmatic:
- wrong
A statement does not truth make.
- dangerous (for those who believe it and for the rest of the European race)
No such thing as a european race, only the human race. One might as well make distinctions based on hair colour and eye colour, as skin colour.
I see no adequate explanation as to why it might be viewed as dangerous.
- spread by government and establishment propaganda and big money is behind it
Just like the Kennedy assasinations, the death of Diana and the Roswell cover up. The important question of course would be of course to who’s advantage would government of european states or business be promoting such an agenda? The only logical answer is European states, and profit. The first is not problematic, the second, would depend on whether you see capitlaism as a useful perspective? If you do then presumably you also follow the ideology that profit promotes everybody’s agenda, creating wealth which benefits all.
- for the most part hypocritical
- insensitive to the plight of its victims, and in the same time claiming the moral high ground
Where are the victims of multiculturalism, I hear many voices claiming victim status, but see no evidence to support the argument that they are indeed victims.
- the proponents of this view are totally intolerant of any other opinion, e.g. they see no problem that a Bundesbank director or a fashion designer can lose his (totally unrelated) job for his opinion, in fact, they think these bastards should be taught a lesson
Is that a ‘demand’ of the multiculturalists, or is it the banks sensitivity to public opinion, and the association in the memory of public opinion between ideas of Race and the holocaust.
- plus some other reasons I forgot to mention
Well never mind I’m sure they will come back to you in time.
@Enigmatic:
Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is still the truth.
MK Ghandi
@Sophie Miller (Re: “MacDonalds ideas are based on a false premise”):
Well, what is that false premise?
@Enigmatic:
-Sophie represents the dogmatic blindness of Multi-culturalism and therefore anyone attempting to highlight counter-arguments against her chosen “faith” will be met with a closed mind and open hostility.
Hmm, evidence, hypothesis, evidence reformulation of hypothesis, clearly a definition of ‘closed mind’ I was previously unaware of.
-Sophie should be met with ridicule and contempt in the same fashion that Rachael Maddow labeled tea-partiers as “tea baggers.” Isn’t that right Sophie?? hahaha Right out of the Saul Alinsky playbook baby.
So you seem to propose here that your argument consists of ‘Ridicule and contempt’ I am uncertain how that lends authority to your argument.
@Enigmatic:
-Sophie represents the dogmatic blindness of Multi-culturalism and therefore anyone attempting to highlight counter-arguments against her chosen “faith” will be met with a closed mind and open hostility.
Hmm, evidence, hypothesis, evidence reformulation of hypothesis, clearly a definition of ‘closed mind’ I was previously unaware of.
-Sophie should be met with ridicule and contempt in the same fashion that Rachael Maddow labeled tea-partiers as “tea baggers.” Isn’t that right Sophie?? hahaha Right out of the Saul Alinsky playbook baby.
So you seem to propose here that your argument consists of ‘Ridicule and contempt’ I am uncertain how that lends authority to your argument.
@Anon2: That you can make any assumptions or subsequent deductions on the behaviour of a group (Or an individual for that matter) without empirical evidence. Which is what MacDonald does.
@Sophie Miller:
This is how you describe Macdonald’s “false premise”: That you can make any assumptions or subsequent deductions on the behaviour of a group (Or an individual for that matter) without empirical evidence. Which is what MacDonald does.
What I understand you to be saying is that MacDonald has made an argument based on an assumption that is either false or completely unsupported by any evidence. I’m interested in what you perceive to be MacDonald’s argument. It would be very helpful to me if you would state what that false or unsupported assumption is. Also, what do you understand his conclusion to be?
From what I can gather you see him making an argument in a classic structure like this:
Premise 1: False/unsupported assumption(s). Please state what this assumption is.
Other premises: Y, Z, etc.
Conclusion: Please state what you see as his conclusion.
Thank you.
@Sophie Miller:
Just curious—Have you read Kevin MacDonald’s trilogy?
@Sophie Miller:
You suggest that MacDonald makes an erroneous argument based on assumptions or subsequent deductions on the behaviour of a group (Or an individual for that matter) without empirical evidence.
What, in your view, is this assumption made by MacDonald that is either false or completely unsupported by evidence? And what do you understand to be the conclusion of MacDonald’s argument?
Message for Gabor and Anon2, and any others of similar mindset.
I do wish good people like yourselves would learn to acquire stronger discriminatory powers. Why are you treating the commenter “Sophie Miller” with respect, instead of contempt? Why do you persist in debate engagement with someone who is (obviously to most others) so insincere, and a probable duplicitous agent?
Whoever Sophie Miller truly is, ‘she’ isn’t female. A male mind is writing ‘her’ comments. And she probably isn’t white, therefore the moniker has been chosen to deliberately deceive twice over, just so the naive can be seduced into letting their guards down.
If “Sophie Miller” isn’t an Ashkenazi Jew, or an employee of the ADL, or connected with one of George Soros’ many subversive organizations … then ‘she’ is an Indian ‘academic’ who has come here to peddle one of the most ridiculous and bogus genetic migration theories yet contrived.
Those who believe Europe was first inhabited by peoples who origins lie in India, have got a major screw loose, if not three.
It is complete hogwash, and you Mr. Gabor should NOT be engaging in intense and sincere dialogue with anyone who is promoting such contemptible nonsense.
Let us not encourage the posting of any more, self-inflicted, and highly embarrassing comments here at TOO.
Let “Sophie Miller” wither on the vine. Such vermin deserve to be on the end of a fast swinging broadsword, and not on the end of your silly questions and queries.
@Anglo Saxon:
Hear, Hear! Well said Anglo Saxon, and hopefully our audience will take your words to heart.
@Anon2:
“This is how you describe Macdonald’s “false premise”: That you can make any assumptions or subsequent deductions on the behaviour of a group (Or an individual for that matter) without empirical evidence. Which is what MacDonald does.”
“What I understand you to be saying is that MacDonald has made an argument based on an assumption that is either false or completely unsupported by any evidence. I’m interested in what you perceive to be MacDonald’s argument. It would be very helpful to me if you would state what that false or unsupported assumption is.”
MacDonald’s false premise is that ‘Genetic racial uniqueness’ and ethnocentrism can be seen as causal effects for Jewish survival, success and supposed influence in power structures of western democracies, He provides no evidence to exclude other potentially more influential factors. He further makes flawed interpretations of other evidence to support his argument where it more realistically contradicts it. E.g. Jewish population in the 15th century, and the potential influence of population isolation via Christian religio/political segregation throughout most of the last 1700 years (using Constantine as the historical Marker) which represent a far more likely causal factor, not only of genetic uniqueness but also of ethnocentric practices.
“I’m interested in what you perceive to be MacDonald’s argument.”
Summarising: MacDonalds argument seems to me to be that through exercising ethnocentric practices, e.g. no inter-group marriages ect, and valuing ‘book learning’ for want of a better word, Judaism has for Jews, represented a survival strategy, which has allowed it to endure relatively intact, and subsequently allowed Jews to achieve positions of influence within organisations and governments.
“It would be very helpful to me if you would state what that false or unsupported assumption is.”
See above.
“Also, what do you understand his conclusion to be?”
That ethnocentric practices represent a survival strategy for a group.
“From what I can gather you see him making an argument in a classic structure like this:
Premise 1: False/unsupported assumption(s). Please state what this assumption is.
Other premises: Y, Z, etc.
You missed out inductive and deductive reasoning, and formulation of testable hypothesis’s and nul-hypothesis’s, Hypothesis testing, and reformulation.
To which we could also add factor analysis, and non linear mathematical analysis of results and other data.
Conclusion: Please state what you see as his conclusion.
Repeating ourselves a bit aren’t we, I could cut and paste if you like but seems like wasted effort.
@Alex Kurtagic:
Yes.
@Anglo Saxon: “I do wish good people like yourselves would learn to acquire stronger discriminatory powers. Why are you treating the commenter “Sophie Miller” with respect, instead of contempt?”
An interesting approach, though it isn’t clear to me how ‘contempt’ represents a logical rebuttal of an argument.
Why do you persist in debate engagement with someone who is (obviously to most others) so insincere, and a probable duplicitous agent?
How do my contributions here represent ‘insincerity’? What evidence do you have that what I have so far posted is not what I believe? How might I be a ‘duplicitous agent’? Have I obscured my agenda? Am I pretending to argue one point of view when I believe another?
“Whoever Sophie Miller truly is, ‘she’ isn’t female. A male mind is writing ‘her’ comments. And she probably isn’t white, therefore the moniker has been chosen to deliberately deceive twice over, just so the naive can be seduced into letting their guards down.”
You seem remarkably concerned to focus on my ‘identity’, rather than the argument offered. How does my identity influence the validity or invalidity of my argument?
If “Sophie Miller” isn’t an Ashkenazi Jew, or an employee of the ADL, or connected with one of George Soros’ many subversive organizations … then ‘she’ is an Indian ‘academic’ who has come here to peddle one of the most ridiculous and bogus genetic migration theories yet contrived.
Interesting that mitochondrial DNA supports Cro-Magnon migration across Asia and into Europe, and the linguistic evidence further supports a break in the indo-European languages at the period I describe. However I still don’t see how my identity whatever it is influences the validity of the argument offered.
Those who believe Europe was first inhabited by peoples who origins lie in India, have got a major screw loose, if not three.
And before India, Africa,
It is complete hogwash, and you Mr. Gabor should NOT be engaging in intense and sincere dialogue with anyone who is promoting such contemptible nonsense.
Hmm, how is it contemptible, especially if it is supported by empirical evidence.
Let us not encourage the posting of any more, self-inflicted, and highly embarrassing comments here at TOO.
Er, sounds almost like a compliment, I suppose I should say thank you.
Let “Sophie Miller” wither on the vine. Such vermin deserve to be on the end of a fast swinging broadsword, and not on the end of your silly questions and queries.
Ah I see mob rule rather than the rule of law?
@Sophie Miller:
Your grammar and syntax aren’t a model of clarity and English is apparently not your first language. That’s fine, it doesn’t mean your views are necessarily wrong, but you might want to take your own verbal aptitude into consideration when people you meet have trouble understanding you at first. By the way, I submitted two posts because the first one was not initially released by the moderator system and I thought it may have been lost.
Your response implies, in two places, that you believe that Jews are characterized by “genetic uniqueness” and “ethnocentric practices.” You also propose that Jews have influence within organizations and governments. Assuming that MacDonald believes the same, you are both in agreement on those three propositions.
I take it, then, that you simply differ with MacDonald on the cause of what you see as “Jewish influence” in the world. As scientists, amateur or professional, you have observed a phenomenon (“Jewish influence”) and are seeking to explain it. He, according to you, believes that genetics and ethnocentric practices are causal factors. You, based on what you have written, believe that those facts are not causal factors but that there are different causal factors.
Or do you? You refer to “potentially more influential factors,” which implies agreement that the factors that MacDonald has identified are indeed influential. So maybe you do agree with MacDonald on his factors, but you differ with him in that you believe he has not taken into account other, salient factors? (What are these? Why don’t you state what they are?) But at the same time, you have decried such purported influence of genetics and ethnocentric practices as a “false premise”–rather strong language–so it isn’t clear to me where your thinking is on this.
It would certainly be helpful to me if you would identify these “potentially more influential factors” in causing “Jewish influence.” You point to what you call “Christian politico/religio segregation for 1700 years,” but you use that to explain what you see as Jewish genetic difference and ethnocentrism. Therefore, that “segregation,” in your own view, is the source of MacDonald’s causal factors. That doesn’t contradict his theory at all. But you have revealed nothing at all as an alternative to MacDonald’s causal factors to explain influence, much less something that would exclude MacDonald’s factors as causal agents.
In summary, you and MacDonald agree on three important propositions and you seek to explain what you see as “Jewish influence” in the world. There is a correlation between the three. He posits a causation. You appear to disagree (or do you?) but have refused really to explain why. You could start by explaining:
1. On what basis you exclude his two factors as possible causal agents.
2. What other more significant factors are there to explain what you see as “Jewish influence.”
@Anon2:
“Your grammar and syntax aren’t a model of clarity and English is apparently not your first language.”
Have you considered Dyslexia? Born and bred British, recipient of free school milk, when everybody got it. With recipients of an OBE and George Cross in the family from the War, interestingly enough, both from the far east theatre, make of that what you will. A Great grandfather who died in a ‘training’ trench in England 1916 of pneumonia, arising from Flu, his wife raised their only daughter by running a sea side boarding house, partly funded by her War widows pension.
I Remember Rainy City from before the Arndale was built.
“Your response implies, in two places, that you believe that Jews are characterized by “genetic uniqueness” and “ethnocentric practices.” “
No: neither necessarily characterise Jews.
The first is demonstrable in genetic studies, though it is also demonstrable in other communities living outside the land of origin, e.g. the Chinese Communities in various ‘Chinatowns’ around the world.
The second is demonstrable up to a point, certainly into the first half of the twentieth century, though from that date the picture is less clear. It is however also something that can be said of other communities, gypsies for instance. So each represent things that can be evidenced. This does not lead to a supposition of characterisation.
They may be identified as elements, contributing to characterisation, but not sufficient, in and of themselves
“You also propose that Jews have influence within organizations and governments.”
I think that as I described that influence as ‘supposed’ qualifies that somewhat.
“Assuming that MacDonald believes the same, you are both in agreement on those three propositions.”
Clearly not from the above.
“I take it, then, that you simply differ with MacDonald on the cause of what you see as “Jewish influence” in the world. As scientists, amateur or professional, you have observed a phenomenon (“Jewish influence”) and are seeking to explain it. He, according to you, believes that genetics and ethnocentric practices are causal factors. You, based on what you have written, believe that those facts are not causal factors but that there are different causal factors.”
I think that there are different causal factors for Jewish survival certainly.
As to ‘Jewish influence’ I think there are themes about how policy making, particularly in an international sense tend towards favouring Israel, however I do not see these as arising out of ‘Jewish Influence’.
“Or do you? You refer to “potentially more influential factors,” which implies agreement that the factors that MacDonald has identified are indeed influential.”
Or given that I qualified ‘influence’ as ‘supposed’ that the factors I consider influential refer to Jewish survival, rather than influence.
“So maybe you do agree with MacDonald on his factors, but you differ with him in that you believe he has not taken into account other, salient factors? “
To be honest I don’t think his factors are in the slightest bit relevant in the context that he places them.
(What are these? Why don’t you state what they are?)
Second question first: It wasn’t relevant at that point.
First question second: Because given that I am arguing that MacDonald has made a false assumption based on no evidence, of a connection between ‘genetic uniqueness’ ‘ethnocentrism,’ and ‘supposed influence’ the better explanations of ‘supposed influence’ tend to eliminate the concept of influence, or at least within the conceptual framework MacDonald offers.
Essentially this puts us in a position where there are two completely separated narratives which are linked only by the concepts of Judaism, and influence. Hence in your narrative, your apparent association between ‘more influential factors’ and ‘Jewish Influence’, which however only has a limited connection with the narrative I am offering. A situation that would not exist had MacDonald provided empirical evidence for his assumption.
In order for you to connect with the alternative and better evidenced narrative, you will need to consider what ‘influence’ means, and accommodate that it’s source might not be within the community which it benefits.
I could simply have stated ‘Holocaust’, and the narratives associated with it. Which provide far more empirical evidence, for influence favouring Jews individually, Judaism generally and Israel specifically, which do not arise from the Jewish Community directly in any way whatsoever. (And therefore are uninfluenced by Genetics or ethnocentrism) Though an argument that Israel has capitalised and manipulated these narratives might be constructed.
“But at the same time, you have decried such purported influence of genetics and ethnocentric practices as a “false premise”–rather strong language–so it isn’t clear to me where your thinking is on this.”
This is why having empirical evidence to support an association is so important, and further exposes the falsity of MacDonald’s assumptions.
“It would certainly be helpful to me if you would identify these “potentially more influential factors” in causing “Jewish influence.”
Do you see how easy it is to end up at a false conclusion after beginning from a false assumption. By assuming the ‘more influential factors’ referred to ‘Jewish influence’ you are now asking a question which it is pointless for me to answer.
Now we might debate if it was my lack of clarity which gave rise to this or if it was a projection of meaning where none existed, on your part. Either way is not particularly significant, that it leads to a false conclusion however, seems axiomatic.
“You point to what you call “Christian politico/religio segregation for 1700 years,” but you use that to explain what you see as Jewish genetic difference and ethnocentrism. Therefore, that “segregation,” in your own view, is the source of MacDonald’s causal factors.“
Again a false conclusion reached because the premise was false.
“That doesn’t contradict his theory at all. But you have revealed nothing at all as an alternative to MacDonald’s causal factors to explain influence, much less something that would exclude MacDonald’s factors as causal agents.”
This arises because where the ‘influence’ can be identified, it doesn’t arise from within Judaism, rather from within the communities which Judaism, for want of a better word, ‘resides.’ Essentially at this point we have arrived at something akin to a fundamental attribution error. Perceptually, you are offering a narrative of ‘influence’ as something that arises from within Judaism and Jews. Something invested in Judaism that causes the influence. Whereas I am offering a narrative of ‘influence’ that arises from outside Judaism, and is therefore not affected by either ethnocentrism, or genetics. There is also good evidence to support my narrative, and very little to support MacDonald’s. To be fair this is because it is logically impossible to create any evidential link between genetics and a cognitive process. Whereas it is much easier to make a direct link between recorded statements and recorded actions.
“In summary, you and MacDonald agree on three important propositions”
Or only conclusively on one, that there is genetic uniqueness in the Jewish population, and possibly partly on another which is ‘ethnocentric’ practices.
“And you seek to explain what you see as “Jewish influence” in the world.”
A false conclusion, drawn from a false assumption. Perhaps you should stop reading MacDonald’s books.
“There is a correlation between the three. He posits a causation. You appear to disagree (or do you?) but have refused really to explain why.”
It wasn’t relevant at that point, since it seemed more practical to clearly state MacDonald’s ideas. You assume refusal. Why would that be?
“You could start by explaining:
1. On what basis you exclude his two factors as possible causal agents.”
Because they relate specifically to an un-provable association, between two pieces of ‘evidence’ and a debatable conclusion on influence as located within Judaism, which is juxtaposed with a demonstrable and clearly evidenced narrative of ‘influence’ arising outside of Judaism.
2. What other more significant factors are there to explain what you see as “Jewish influence.”
Putting aside ‘jewish’ as not a significant factor, the factors that can be seen as explaining ‘influence’ include The Holocaust, non Jewish narratives on the holocaust, developments in historical method, emerging documentation on Early American emigration. The development of secular policy frameworks, pre- and post- WW II, the disassembly of the British Empire, Richard Wagner and Shakespeare. Just for starters.
If you like we can get into Foucault, or Barthes on this subject, even Sasseur might be fun, but he overlaps somewhat with Barthes.
@Sophie Miller:
You’re so typical of the average, garden variety limousine liberal. Dipping a little toe into the multicultural mudpuddle with your little Asian take out dinners and shopping trips to “exotic” neighborhoods whilst you dwell comfortably in the knowledge that you have enough money to avoid multiculturalism’s darker, unsavory side. That’s just for us dumb working class stiffs to deal with, right?
You people with your holier than thou attitudes, steeped in Boasian nonsense, so self righteous, always with the clever comeback, thinking you know what’s best for everyone else. I detest people like you. You smug little sh*ts want to force your way of life on EVERYONE else, and then, with the other side of your mouth, you want to complain about how cruel and undemocratic we all are for not wanting to immerse ourselves in YOUR private utopian fantasies.
Why come here to sites like this? Do you people just get a kick out of being obnoxious? You want a good stiff dose of REAL multiculturalism and not just dipping a little toe, take a decade and go live in Detroit, Watts, Southside Chicago, Atlanta, Los Angeles (where I was born and raised), and I’m sure that England also has it’s wonderful choice neighborhoods as well where you can find whole streetblocks where no one speaks a single word of English and the threat of real violence awaits you around any given corner. Go enjoy this nonsense. Please, go immerse yourself in all the multiculturalism you can handle and stop trying to force your idiotic doctrine based on emotional blather and zero factual evidence on people who have lived through it and now seek a better life for our children.
@Sophie Miller:
I do not think I have ever seen a poster who put in as much effort to try to support a garbage ideology as you have .
Congratulations , you really know how to create long winded and very wordy garbage .
Your postings were painful to get through and we have heard it before and it is still crap .
Please stop wasting your time and ours . Spew your puffed up hot air mumbo-jumbo nonsense some where else . That boat ain’t floatin’ here .
Sophie Miller proves that if you give a PC humanist a key board and a forum , then you have a recipe for the futility of trying to nail jello to a tree .
Don’t even go there . It’s hopeless . Just let it wobble and it will eventually dry up .
@Sophie Miller:
Reading the trilogy and then criticising it is one step above not reading it and doing the same, which is unfortunately what many vocal critics have done.
However, this does not preclude your having given it a hostile reading, with an a priori conclusion and done to better confirm you in your prejudices.
And given the clarity of your ideological commitment, and the conspicuous effort you have made to sound intelligent and educated, this is a reasonable supposition.
You talk about empirical evidence, but this is window-dressing, because the empirical evidence is ultimately irrelevant.
Unless you have done original research of your own, and are really an expert, all you are doing, and all you can do, is repeat what others have said. And as is the case with most people, most not being experts or witnesses to much of what they have opinions on, you simply choose the data set that flatters your vanity.
Your posting here, with the full knowledge that you will not persuade anyone and that no one will persuade you, is simple status display; it is all about your belief in your moral superiority and your desire to show it off, amuse yourself, and get a buzz out of feeling superior to a group of perceived miscreants.
Which is interesting coming from an egalitarian.
The fact is this: you think Whites valuing their uniqueness is immoral, whereas we think so-called ‘multiculturalism’ is immoral.
As has already been noted, ‘multiculturalism’ as a state-sponsored policy has implications for ordinary White people that go far beyond being able to have an Indian takeaway every once in a while.
That you think of ‘multiculturalism’ in terms of Bangladeshi takeaways is, frankly, ignorant, not to mention demeaning to towards their culture, which is complex and goes back millennia. Bangladeshis do not want to be thought of as people who run fast-food restaurants and takeaways.
@Fenria:
You’re so typical of the average, garden variety limousine liberal. Dipping a little toe into the multicultural mudpuddle
How about living on a street where there was only me and one other that were white? Done that.
with your little Asian take out dinners and shopping trips to “exotic” neighborhoods
From my point of view an exotic neighbourhood would be Henley.
whilst you dwell comfortably in the knowledge that you have enough money to avoid multiculturalism’s darker, unsavory side.
What would that be then?
I have enough money to ‘avoid’ but what I avoid, is cities, not multicultural areas, within which I feel fairly comfortable to be honest. Try to avoid gangs though.
That’s just for us dumb working class stiffs to deal with, right?
Hmm, for one thing, what is the working class? Does it even exist any more?
Certainly my Father who was absolutely working class, left school at 15, ect ect, would not recognise those who now claim to be ‘working class’ as such.
You people with your holier than thou attitudes, steeped in Boasian nonsense,
First time I have ever heard of Boas, though a quick google suggests he might be worth a read.
so self righteous,
I think you should clarify how I am being ‘self righteous’ since as far as I can tell I’m expressing a contrary opinion to those expressed here and arguing my case in the face of criticism., if that’s ‘self righteous’ then I suppose I am being, but then if I am, what would necessarily be the problem with that.
always with the clever comeback, thinking you know what’s best for everyone else.
Or am I engaged in an exploration of what might be best for everyone.
I detest people like you. You smug little sh*ts want to force your way of life on EVERYONE else,
How exactly am I forcing my way of life onto anyone else? Rather I think I would argue that I am advocating that people are entitled to live whatever way they want and no group has a right to impose it’s structures for living on any other.
and then, with the other side of your mouth, you want to complain about how cruel and undemocratic we all are for not wanting to immerse ourselves in YOUR private utopian fantasies.
Hmm, where have I said that?
Why come here to sites like this?
Why preach to the Choir?
Do you people just get a kick out of being obnoxious? You want a good stiff dose of REAL multiculturalism and not just dipping a little toe, take a decade and go live in Detroit, Watts, Southside Chicago, Atlanta, Los Angeles (where I was born and raised), and I’m sure that England also has it’s wonderful choice neighborhoods
Does being one of only 30 white children in a school of 300 count.
as well where you can find whole streetblocks where no one speaks a single word of English
So what? Where is it written that communities have to speak English? Or are you arguing for cultural imperialism such as the English exacted on the welsh as regards their language. (Bit of a bounce back at the moment)
and the threat of real violence awaits you around any given corner.
Lived in Moss Side for a while, the gangs were a little alarming, but then gangs are alarming, not sure how that relates to multiculturalism though?
Or are you going to argue that gangs are a product of multiculturalism. How about the ‘beachcomber gangs’ that used to trawl for loot through the wreckage of the Blitz, for instance. Or Hanna and her sisters who used to Mug unwary travellers, travelling between England and Wales. Britain has an extensive history of gang violence, so that can’t be laid at the door of multiculturalism.
It seems to me that you find multiculturalism a convenient target to project your own fears onto.
Oh and as a footnote, the only person in my family anyone ever tried to Mug was my mother, when we were living in a very white neighbourhood, by a white guy with a serious reputation for being a nutcase. My mother being a somewhat old fashioned person kicked him where it counts shoved him over found the nearest phone box and called the police, who arrested her when they arrived, and an ambulance, mostly because the guy had cracked his head on the floor, was unconscious and there was quite a bit of blood. He was in Manchester Royal for six weeks. No charges were brought against my mother and he did six months for assault.
I have always had quite a robust attitude to courage and street violence ever since.
Go enjoy this nonsense. Please, go immerse yourself in all the multiculturalism you can handle
Pretty much do most days of my life, you should try it it’s fun, making new friends, learning new things.
and stop trying to force your idiotic doctrine based on emotional blather and zero factual evidence
What a wonderfully duplicitous statement. ‘zero factual evidence’ how about deaths associated with ‘separate but equal’, violence in all communities associated with Apartheid in South Africa. The Holocaust. Seem like pretty good evidence in favour of multiculturalism to me.
on people who have lived through it and now seek a better life for our children.
Better read up on multiculturalism then because without it the world as a whole doesn’t have much future. You can thank the British empire for that, globalism is not going to be turned back unless of course we slip into a new dark age, oh boy what fun that would be. Not.
I have enjoyed Sophie’s comments and am glad they have been enabled. I’m interested in criticisms of Professor Macdonald’s trilogy, as is Macdonald himself and as we all should be. It seems to me though that the structure of his argument involves a more general attempt to relate the biological and social sciences that Mrs Miller seems wrongly to reject on principle (unless I misunderstand).
The currency of ideas on this site seems to contain also JP Rushton’s and Frank Salter’s ideas where we would also benefit from some critiques. Obviously we have to raise the tone if that is to happen. There are obviously also more political and emotive contributors.
It seems to me that the political project – which is making some headway on immigration, think of the effect Mrs Duffy has on the last election in the UK – needs to be based on verifiable ideas about human nature and these we can best evaluate without ad hominem remarks – from either side of the fence.
Now that I think about it though, I do find Sophie’s statement above that she has read Professor Macdonald’s trilogy hard to reconcile with her claim (also above) that she had never heard of Franz Boas until she googled him! Boas is kind of hard to miss in Culture of Critique after all.
Sophie, you’ve compiled a life story, or Legend, worthy of Ian Fleming or John Le Carre. Or of Baron Munchausen, even. What a fabulist! My hat’s off.
While I hate to agree with the usual gang of rednecks, it is a fact that immigration or “multiculturalism” affects different strata of society in different ways. If you’re rich, immigration is just marvelous. Look at all you get! You get Chinese and Indian restaurants, Korean fruit and vegetable stores (in the USA) and if you have a business yourself, legions of cheap and docile workers.
Immigration is a disaster if you’re one of the poor, however. You will have to accept a Third World wage — if you can get work at all. Without moving from the spot you’ll find you now are living in a foreign country. Or more accurately, you’ll find YOU are the foreigner in your own country! And you’ll just have to put up with it because, remember, you’re poor and unlike your wealthier fellow citizens haven’t the resources to move to where the language and customs are more like home.
@Caleb:
This typifies you as the prejudiced,hateful Jew you really are.”Rednecks” are only poor White farmers in the South.Nothing wrong with them,and they don’t live in “gangs”.(Jews do)Have you not expressed your commitment to “politeness” lately?I don’t see much of it.
Yeah really ,
what some would call a ” red neck ” probably has more ” street smarts ” in his big toe than an urban “liberal” has in his whole body .
@Sophie Miller:
If you like we can get into Foucault, or Barthes on this subject, even Sasseur might be fun, but he overlaps somewhat with Barthes.
By all means, please do go into Foucault, Barthes, and Sasseur on this subject. I’m interested in better understanding your thought process. Perhaps it would also give some perspective on MacDonald’s hypothesis?
@Franklin Ryckaert:
Give credit where credit is due. He is way less prejudiced than most Jews. E.g. he understands why people from lower classes dislike multiculturalism. Not only in the economic sense, but also much of the non-economic reasons, like feeling a foreigner (and becoming a foreigner) in one’s own country.
@Lancashire lad: Indeed.
@Sophie Miller: I looked into the Chicki et al. article, and unfortunately it doesn’t support your idea of North Indians settling in the British isles. Actually, it doesn’t even contain the word “India” or “Indian”. Did you actually read it?
The Coles/Harding book is something I’m not quite keen to read, I doubt it contains any data regarding the genetic origins of anybody, simply because scientific techniques to measure that are relatively recent. So 1979 is a bit too early for that. Same goes for the 1993 Drews book, although it might be an interesting read. I simply doubt it could prove anything, especially since later articles (including your article) argue for a substantial Paleolithic proportion and possibly a large Near Eastern immigrant admixture (your first article is an example of that theory, but it means the UK was precisely one of those places with the smallest possible Near Eastern genetic impact).
The Indo-European language family is not news to me, but it doesn’t prove that British came from India, any more than that Indians came from Britain. BTW PIE was spoken some 6 thousand – and not 14 thousand – years ago. At least that’s the mainstream information.
God forbid! Don’t do that. I had thought you might be a serious opponent, but obviously you are not. Everything you write (Britons descended from Indians, you never heard of Boas after supposedly having read Dr. MacDonald’s work, not to mention your life story) makes you look like a troll of the worst kind.
@Gabor:
Sophie’s illusion of multi-culturalism bringing peace and ethnic harmony is beginning to show cracks, severe cracks. By all means don’t listen to the posters on this site, listen to the leaders of those countries forced to endure your oppressive fantasy-utopia.
MULTICULTURALISM IS DEAD IN THE WEST:
French President Nicolas Sarkozy states: “We have been too concerned about the identity of the immigrant and not enough about the identity of the country that was receiving him.”
German Chancellor Angela Merkel states that multiculturalism is “an absolute failure.” Horst Seehofer, the leader of the Bavarian Christian-Democrats, was even more outspoken. “Multiculturalism is dead.”
-British Prime Minister David Cameron blamed multiculturalism for Islamic extremism. “We have allowed the weakening of our collective identity,” he said. “Under the doctrine of state multiculturalism, we have encouraged different cultures to live […] apart from the mainstream.”
The moral and cultural relativism of Marxism led the West’s political and intellectual elites to adopt a utopian belief in a universal brotherhood of mankind.
The entire leftist elite is guilty of practising cultural relativism. Universities, churches, trade unions, the media, politicians; they are all betraying our hard-won liberties.
Our opponents are aiming for a repetition of the fall of Rome in the 5th century and want to use exactly the same methods. “The strategy of exporting human beings and having them breed in abundance is the simplest way to take possession of a territory,” warned the famous Italian author Oriana Fallaci.
@Gabor: And how do you know, Gabor, that I am a Jew? Is it because anyone who can put two sentences together with proper spelling and grammar HAS to be a Jew?
@Enigmatic: I believe the late Ms. Falacci was referring to colonization not immigration.
The main reason a sovereign state admits immigrant groups today or in the past admitted their forebears is because some people thought they could make money off their labor.
@Caleb: That’s an educated guess based on your comments. That you are doubtless cultured and intelligent, but nevertheless with some biases, makes me think that way. I could explain it further, and in fact I started to write an explanation, but I think it would be off topic here.
You have to accept that until you provide further information on yourself, that’s what I’m going to believe.
I am not 100% sure (of course you could be a Japanese teenager or a fat old black woman), but I find it reasonably likely.
@Gabor: Here’s what I tell everyone who asks:
I do not know my origins. Gypsies stole me as a child and I was brought up in the Persian Gulf in Miami. No no…it’s a Gypsy tea room and restaurant.
@John hearns: “It’s the culture that needs to be re-captured. ”
Now ain’t that the truth!
@Bear: “It is no surprise that a community compartmentalised and divided by diversity, dragged down in sections by low cognitive ability should be the first to breakdown. It is no surprise that a society de-constructed by an endless war on Western values and religion should then show no values but the culture of resentment and disenfranchisement around which it was reconstructed.”
A particularly insightful excerpt from what was a brilliant post overall.
Thank you.
@Caleb: Caleb, there are many times when I unreservedly agree with you. This is NOT one of those times. Passion is an integral part of our struggle to free ourselves from the yolk of oppression our “Masters” have in mind for us.
Without passion and without the kind of courage Bear claims to have, nothing will get done.
Get used to the idea that people will have to die to defend themselves from the violence focused on us.
@Caleb:
Caleb what can I say, your words hold zero weight and you’r a moron. But just for clarities sake…
“The strategy of exporting human beings and having them breed in abundance is the simplest way to take possession of a territory,” warned the famous Italian author Oriana Fallaci.
-Once again, where does the word “immigration” appear?
-But since you clarified the context of the aphorism with “colonization” and not “immigration”lol….why not run with it?
The aforementioned aphorism is analagous to Mexico’s stratagem of exporting Mexican citizens and have them breed in abundance to take possession of territories lost in the Mexican American War.
“@Gabor: Macdonald was sidelined because his ideas make no sense. Giving his work equivalent weight to that of others is akin to demanding that for every professor of evolution there should be a paralell professor of creationism.”
If this limp argument is the best the paid opposition can throw at Professor MacDonald, he’s got nothing to worry about.
Ever.
What a Pile of Poo!
@arthurdecco:
Yes it is the truth .
Just as example , take this Sophie Miller poster . This is the kind of person that this culture produces . Why do they think the way they do ? Because in this culture it is ” hip ” They truly believe the politically correct nonsense that they spew . They go to great lengths to support it . Because they need to fit in . They need to feel a part of the herd . They need to be singing ” up with people ” or ” we are the world” b.s. songs .
Reality is manufactured for them by the culture . They adhere to it . Life imitates art if you asked me .
I do think that this Sophie Miller poster is a good specimen for WN’s to study . I will assume she is a she , so I will say that she is typical of the modern ” educated” drone that this system spits out .
I bet she is a feminist and ” environmentally friendly” with hostility to organized religion . I bet she has pets and probably has no kids or maybe one who is a homosexual . Was married and divorced .
I am just assuming , and those are just guesses .
@John hearns:
Oh , and one other characteristic of these PC drones like Sophie Miller …
They actually think they are ” free thinkers ” They feel that they are rebels taking on the establishment .
Meanwhile , they are spit out of the cookie cutter system like a car on the line , all being run by the establishment . They had their opinions installed for them by the system and they don’t even know it .
I think that is another lesson for WN’s ..
People like feel they are ” free thinkers ” , people like feel like they are ” rebels ”
The mainstream culture has produced an environment where these retards think that they are taking on the establishment by fighting against the ” old fashioned racists ” who these people think of as the establishment . They have not the common sense to realize that the establishment is behind political correctness and that they are conforming .
It would go a long way to give people a jolt of reality as to illustrate that WN’s are the true rebels who are taking on the status quo .
But , that’s not easy to do because these people are very much indoctrinated .
Last note , for now …
That is why the mainstream culture is contstantly replaying the past few decades . Like jeans and bell bottoms are never out . All types of fashion of the ” counter culture” years are brought back in style . The seventies are replayed . The sixties are replayed over and over in fashion and music and art and cinema by the system .
We are stuck in various cycles of basically the same decades of social reviolution . The establishment wants to keep the mindset stuck in the hippie years when the patriarch was in charge and white people were in charge and ” repressive ” .
This way the establishment can keep up the ruse that the establishment is conservative and ” racist ” and keep up the illusion to the sheeple that it is rebellious and free thinking to be basically what we know as politically correct .
@Sophie Miller: says Macdonald was sidelined because his ideas make no sense. Giving his work equivalent weight to that of others is akin to demanding that for every professor of evolution there should be a paralell professor of creationism.
His work has been endorsed by, among others, David Sloan Wilson and Frank Salter. Their recommendations mean a lot, especially since their work in turn has been praised by E.O. Wilson. There are serious heavyweights that find great value in MacDonald’s work. His work is politically incorrect at the moment, but then again, EO Wilson was famously accosted (with ice water) by feminists in the 70s, and called a fascist and a racist by the usual suspects. Now he is almost universally recognized as an important thinker in evolutionary biology.
Sometimes it takes a while for the poor, sad, Humanities major types to catch up … Sophie.
@Caleb: Caleb, this is the so-called internet. You can claim to be whatever you like.
However, your background is not totally unimportant. Consider the following statement: “The penal code is very light, and you can get away even with a most serious offenses after serving a few years in a recreational center called ‘prison’.” – does it matter whether the person making the statement is a convict or ex-convict, or if he is a judge, or just a layperson? Of course it does. Especially since the topic is the future of a racial group and their interactions with other racial and ethnic groups, be they Blacks, Mexicans, Jews, or anybody else. But of course you have every right not to disclose any information. Others will continue to make guesses, though.
@Lancashire lad: I will concede that it is some time since I read most of this stuff, and when I because I found so much of it laughable that I put no effort into rehearsing details.
So MacDonald does indeed include a good deal on Boas, frankly I didn’t remember the name. I had to look MacDonald up to remind myself of whi he was though so that’s hardly a suprise.
So I must have heard of him, Just forgot him, probably through the association in my head with MacDonald.
@Caleb:
While I hate to agree with the usual gang of rednecks, it is a fact that immigration or “multiculturalism” affects different strata of society in different ways. If you’re rich, immigration is just marvelous. Look at all you get! You get Chinese and Indian restaurants,
Er last I heard the poor were the biggest consumers of takaway food in the Uk
Korean fruit and vegetable stores (in the USA) and if you have a business yourself, legions of cheap and docile workers.
Immigration is a disaster if you’re one of the poor, however. You will have to accept a Third World wage — if you can get work at all.
Why? there is a minimum wage in the UK and it is for the most part enforced. If you know conclusively of someone who is not offering a minmum wage, report them, if someone knows this and does not report it then they are the problem not immigration.
Without moving from the spot you’ll find you now are living in a foreign country.
Again why? How is it foreign? All the Social Structures operate on the English language? Anyone seeking to do anything in Britain will have to use English, the English are too lazy to learn other languages for one thing. Mostly because we never have to.
Or more accurately, you’ll find YOU are the foreigner in your own country!
That makes no sense to me whatsoever.
And you’ll just have to put up with it because, remember, you’re poor and unlike your wealthier fellow citizens haven’t the resources to move to where the language and customs are more like home.
I wonder if someone from 1850, would have recognised the language and Customs of the 1950′s Almost certainly not.
If I think of some of the ‘Language’ and ‘Customs’ of the 1970′s for instance they are long gone and good riddance.
@Caleb:
This type of “evasive humour” is typically Jewish.I have outed you long ago as a Jew already.When push comes to shove you attack Whites,ridicule WN and defend Jews and Israel.Your style of “arguing” and socalled “humour” is also typically Jewish.There are people with a Jewdar who can detect a Jew even if he appears only as letters on a screen.Get over it.
@Gabor:
Gabor,please write that explanation.I’m interested.
@Anon2:
Ok, essentialy Sasseur gives a theory concerning the construction of symbols. However much we try, we cannot describe the real world completely, we are limited by our senses, upon which we cannot rely 100%, so ‘real things’ or referents, are always subtly different from whatever idea we have in our minds, or the symbolised, to communicate we try to share the ideas in our minds with others using symbols, or symbolyser.
Barthes extends this idea to discuss how abstractions are formed to become referents without tangible existance. for example things like Justice, Fairness, or even God. Which no matter how hard you look you will find no particle or fragment of in the real world, yet exist in the minds of Humans.
Foucault, extends this further into considering the mechanisms of how ideas are formed, essentially arguing that ideas are constructed on other ideas, in response to what is said by who and when and who to. From this we discover that ideas we are used to thinking of as factual are discuvered to simply be constructs based on nothing more than belief. Associated with this are narratives about knowledge, which can be even more socially powerful.
It very quickly becomes aparent that more often than not supposed knowledge is more a belief, rather than a fact.
A good example would be the long held belief that Richard III was a hunchback, had a limp and killed the Princes in the tower. More recent evidence has suggested very strongly that this is all Tudor Propoganda, perpetuated in part by Shakespeare, who probably believed it himself. The Princes in the tower can certainly be refuted because Richard was 3 at the time they died.
Yet this is just another construction, which no doubt will be replaced my a more verifyable one in the future, and so on.
Now in terms of MacDonald, he takes a paradigm with a percieved concrete scientific foundation, Genetics, and constructs an entire theory based on this, which has a strong narrative and seems plausable, and reasonable, however on deconstructing his argument, it seems evident that he is building arguemnts on arguments, and narratives on narratives, based on the seeming inviolability of the ‘scientific evidence’ Yet it is straightforward to argue that genetic uniqueness within Judaism arises out of the small population in the 15th century, rather than as a result of ethnocentric practices over 2000 years.
Yet the real lie to his argument arises from the construction and perpetuation of other narratives, Some we might criticise as free flowing. ie, narratives about Jewish experience that pass freely within society. e.g. ‘the jews suffered,’ ‘jews deserve a homeland’, ‘she has survived despite experiences in the Holocaust’, these narratives have powerful influence on popular conceptions, coluring both pro Israeli and anti Israeli ideology. And providing situations where Jews might be favoured without any recourse to anything intrinsic within Jews or Judaism
In a more concrete sense we have the narratives of Jews themselves, which provide as close to concrete evidence of Jewish motivation as might be expected. Certainly in the post war years these are almost exclusively driven by the narrative of ancestral debt. e.g. ‘My parents died in Auschwits, I owe them to make the best I can of things.’
These narratives provide a better understanding of ‘achievement’ among Jews, than MacDonalds rather limp and unsophisticated approach which gets bogged down both in justifications of his own position and constructing numerous narratives concerning supposed Jewish Infiltration of social and political elites, in order to construct an idea about ‘Jewish Influence’ derived from ethnocentric practices.
MacDonald of course does not help his case by giving evidence in support of David Irving, which then associates his ideas with revisionist history, which interestingly has only begun to emerge as the many many people with personal experiences of the death camps have begun to die. Or put another way since the first hand personal evidence, has been reduced from a narrative delivered by those with experience, (This is not so much the survivors of the camps, as it is the soldiers who relived them, e.g. Michael Bentine) to one reported on by those with no experience.
Something similar happened to good old Richard III.
In terms of social phenomena, What is said to who and when is far more important and tangiable than genetics, which in the case of the Jews simply demonstrate that at some point in the past their numbers were small and very little else.
@Enigmatic: Do you truly believe that any Mexican government can adhere to a single policy for over 150 years? If part of the USA is to be reintegrated in Mexico, how do you explain all those Mexican politicians, starting with Santa Ana himself and right up to the Chief of Police of Monterey last month, seeking refuge in the United States when things got too hot for them south of the border?
Today it is ninety-five percent the Chamber of Commerce that promotes mass immigration in all its forms. Every time you get a takeout meal delivered to your home or office, you get your lawn professionally landscaped instead of lifting the sod yourself, you employ someone Off The Books to clean your home or care for your children, YOU are adding to the problem.
In countries like Sweden, people do these things for themselves, quite happily. Due to a low birth rate they take in a certain number of immigrants but nothing like in the USA.
@Sophie Miller: As for the takeout food, you are probably right. Unfortunately, the poor also tend to laziness and the desire to feel rich — or at least rich-ER — even for a few minutes. [Forward-looking companies encourage their office employees to forego the "lift" and take the stairs. Try it some time; see who you meet.]
But not all Chinese and Indian restaurants are just takeaway. You can get a served meal, brought by a family member who is probably paid on the usual scale: “all you can eat. All you can steal”.
We have lots of laws in the USA, too. And a minimum wage that is almost Third World. There also is a huge “informal” economy of sub-minimum wage, dirty and downright dangerous working conditions and no holidays, sick days or medical insurance.
Mass immigration has served globalization — a trick pulled by corporations on the people — not tolerance for other cultures.
@Caleb: Sweden doesn’t have a very low birth rate. It’s around 2.0, and if you also believe that humans do have some impact on the climate, you might think that some reduction in population numbers is well due. Also, Sweden is taking a lot of immigrants – I think on the order of 100 thousand per year, for a country of maybe 9 million people. That’s proportionally actually more than in the US.
So there must be some cultural reasons for taking in large numbers of immigrants, because the economic reasons just don’t seem to be enough. For example yesterday in Switzerland a Kosovo Albanian shot dead his ex-wife (and mother of his five children), after which he drove to another location and shot dead a Swiss woman. The Swiss woman was head of the local Sozialamt (social office) – the whole family (divorced mother with the children and the divorced and separately living father) were living off social benefits (and he considered the Swiss woman responsible for not giving him enough money). The SVP (Swiss People’s Party) is struggling to get such immigrants out of the country, and there’s a public outcry by the usual suspects against the SVP in the media all over Europe. There are simply no business interests for that – in fact, it’s bad for the business, because without these people, taxes could be lowered further. Price levels are also affected, because Switzerland is already highly overcrowded, and accommodation costs are very high. In fact, all real estate rental costs are very high. Kicking out a few hundred thousand people draining resources (social benefits, schooling, etc.) would only help business by lowering real estate rental costs and taxes alike.
So while big business is without doubt contributing to the problem, it cannot be the sole reason for taking in immigrants.
@Sophie Miller:
I agree that concepts in the natural sciences are abstract and only approximate reality, though not with the relativism that might easily lead to. I can’t comment on your French references other than on Foucault. Foucault’s early writings (Histoire de la Folie) are in fact quite close to Kevin Macdonald’s position, as I understand it, as both think of culture as something manipulated by an elite, more than (or as well as) a distinterested pursuit of truth. I think Macdonald derives this ultimately from Marx (he is a former 60s Marxist) whereas for Foucault it comes from Nietzsche’s theory of the will to power. Hence according to Foucault ideas of rationality were (supposedly) imposed through the institution of the madhouse in the 18th century through the will to power of a post-medieval rationalist elite.
However, another ingredient in Professor Macdonald’s synthesis is his endorsement of evolutionary and empirical psychology as neutral sciences by which some cultural manipulations typical of multicultural societies can be identified. Of these he has selected the three threads of Culture of Critique as instances. Rather than finding his ideas laughable – though there is an element of humour in realising how one has been taken in and the skill of those who accomplished the feat – I find them interesting but incomplete. What is needed is an account of European culture with a firmer empirical basis. Perhaps on that subject, we are in agreement, if on little else.
On the holocaust revisionist point that you raise, you might be interested in former Buchenwald inmate Paul Rassinier’s writings. These show that the idea of revising WW2 history long predates the imminent or recent demise of the survivors. I agree that such investigations can be done irresponsibly and inadequately and for unworthy motives, but taking the trouble to read some recent criticisms of the holocaust theory, I’ve been surprised at their general cogency, though I don’t accept them wholesale. This issue of course doesn’t seem to be a particular focus of this site.
Anyway, it will be good to hear more from you on other threads if the online invective doesn’t dissuade you. There’s nothing like a lively debate!
@Sophie Miller:
Sophie, thanks for highlighting the subjective nature of theory. I would add some of my own favorites including Sayeed, Geertz and Bourdieu.
-The only problem remains that:
Whilst existing in this post-modern paradigm of tolerance and subjectivity YOU claim to have the “truth” and thereby refuse to accomodate evidence running contrary to your “faith.”
Sophie states:
1.”Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is still the truth.” Wow Sophie, if you have the truth why quote “theory” to support your truth?lol
2. Sophie’s stated truth: “Multiculturalism works because it is based in real science, ie, it proposes a hypothesis, which stands until refuted by evidence, after which it reformulates a new hypothesis, accommodating the newly discovered evidence.” Umm no it doesn’t. Multicult is dogma for you and the rest of your ilk and under the extreme weight of evidence against it, you steadfastly march forward to the beat of it’s racist, destructive drum.
-And you say, “Multi-cult will change when the evidence shows that it needs change.” Ok, here’s my evidence proving the paradigm needs revision:
WESTERN LEADERS STATE: MULTICULTURALSIM IS DEAD
-French President Nicolas Sarkozy states: “We have been too concerned about the identity of the immigrant and not enough about the identity of the country that was receiving him.”
German Chancellor Angela Merkel states that multiculturalism is “an absolute failure.” Horst Seehofer, the leader of the Bavarian Christian-Democrats, was even more outspoken. “Multiculturalism is dead.”
-British Prime Minister David Cameron blamed multiculturalism for Islamic extremism. “We have allowed the weakening of our collective identity,” he said. “Under the doctrine of state multiculturalism, we have encouraged different cultures to live […] apart from the mainstream.”
-So now that Multi-cult has been weighed, measured, and found wanting, lets wait for a new theory which respects the rights of people to live with their own ethnic groups on their own terms.
-Because you yourself have stated that “people are entitled to live whatever way they want.” So we WHITES wish to live together as exemplified in the Japanese model of homogeneity. Case closed.
-But actually, you are in agreement with my argument as you state “Where is it written in multiculturalism that any particular culture should give up it’s identity?”
-Exactly Sophie and I wish this were the case. But for some reason Whites have been forced to give up our ethnic identity while watching people of color doggedly celebrate their ethnic heritage in the forms of La Raza, Adl, JDL, ACLU. A little hypocritical perhaps?
-And according to Merkel, Sarkozy, and David Cameron, Multi-culturalism is the culprit forcing us to give up our culture and identity while people of color celebrate theirs.
- So I don’t really understand your piety in defending multi-cult. Do you pray to multi-cult at night asking for protection and blessings? Because you really come off as a religious zealot refusing to incoporate evidence running contrary to your faith.
@Gabor: Judges and convicts come in all faiths, all colors. I really do not see the parallel.
Ir’s not the “so-called internet”. It’s the internet. Truly, I don’t have to prove anything, and you don’t have to believe anything.
@Gabor: Yes, and the the Foreign Minister of Sweden was knifed to death by a crazy Serb while trying on dresses in a department store.
Sweden took in many asylum seekers, at least until 2008 when its economy tanked. The birth rate for ethnic Swedes still is below replacement. What brings it up somewhat is the foreign-born component. It still is A THIRD of the birth rate of say, Nigeria.
Significantly, up to 1980 Sweden had one of the lowest birth rates in the world — a shortfall being felt today. The government instituted measures to increase it but as the birth rate rose, so did the illegitimacy rate. With the state as provider, husbands are not needed.
The USA does not have the generous level of social benefits found in Western Europe. We also have illegal aliens — something unknown in highly regimented Switzerland and much harder to become and remain in Sweden where foreigners stand out more and there are no land borders with the Third World.
Illegal aliens are not eligible for most benefits in the USA, so whether they are a net drain on the economy here is a close question. Anyone working in the formal economy is subject to withholding, whether or not their Social Security number is genuine. If they file a tax return, seeking a refund of overpaid tax, and their SS# belongs to someone else, they’re caught. Nor, unless there’s a sweeping amnesty, will they collect Social Security pensions or Medicare benefits on retirement despite having paid in while working.
All this limits many illegal aliens to employment in the “informal” economy, which is just fine with restaurateurs who need another dishwasher, construction contractors who need more hands to meet a sudden housing boom, hotels, supermarkets, even trucking companies — not to mention growers in the vital agricultural sector.
Also, illegal aliens pay local sales taxes like everyone AND even property taxes inasmuch as until recently there was nothing to prevent an illegal alien from buying real estate. Indeed, some had the mistaken idea that they could not be deported because “I own a house here”.
@Caleb:
Caleb, are you really having a dialouge with yourself?LOL Priceless.
Where did I state that the “Mexican government can adhere to a single policy for over 150 years?” Cmon buddy, ya don’t want to start making things up like some poor redneck.
But since you said this,
“Mass immigration has served globalization — a trick pulled by corporations on the people — not tolerance for other cultures,”
who really cares about Mexico anyways?LOL
Hey do you think the corporations were behind the 1965 immigration act thus promoting the bill’s original sponsors via some type of “carrot and stick” strategy? Do you know the names of the corporations or should we just call them “corporations?”
Only a liberal lunatic is capable of blaming ” the
corporations ”
As if Shell oil , or GM , etc , has some world conquering agenda to multi-cult the world so it can sell more gas or autos . Yeah that must be it !
It is not a race/religion that has stated a timeless quest to rule the world .
You talk about stupidity .
@John hearns: Hate is a poor substitute for intellect, Johnny.
It is not necessary to rule a country in order to dominate its economy. We gave up trying to conquer Canada in 1814 but American companies call the shots there today. Then there’s the economic subservience of Australia to the Japanese.
Under the banner of Globalization — or for the truly gullible, Free Trade — Motorola applies for more H-1B visa slots to bring in foreign workers even while it lays off thousands of Americans. Already, IBM has more employees in India than in the USA. It’s called job offshoring and there isn’t a thing this government can do about it.
PS: The Taj was built by Shah Jahan, a Moslem. They don’t HAVE a caste system.
@Caleb:
The parallel is that your background does matter. For example, if someone talks about Hungarians, then it does matter, whether he is Hungarian or not. For example, if someone praises Hungarians, and he is a Jew (for historical reasons having some animosities toward Hungarians) or a Romanian (same thing), then he might be really objective (praising a people towards which he would be supposed to have some animosities), or if he might still be quite objective if he was Japanese (no interests whatsoever in the matter – although his knowledge and opinion on the matter might be more superficial), or Hungarian (praising his own people – essentially praising himself). So it does matter. But again – you have every right to pretend to be a Japanese teenager, or not to disclose any information. But I repeat, people will keep guessing.
@Enigmatic: Astigmatic, there was no such thing as globalization in 1965. I think you’ve drunk the MacDoodle Kool-Aid.
A deep, dark Jewish conspiracy? No one intended or foresaw in 1965 that there would be mass immigration from the Western Hemisphere mainly using the family unification provisions of the Act. The intent was to allow immigration of South Italians, Lebanese Christians, Poles, Greeks, all of whom were cut off by the 1924 Act because they were not part of America in 1890.
As to Mexico, its former territories became part of the United States under the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. That’s 153 years ago. A few years later came the Gadsden Purchase which set the current southern borders. So, just when did Mexico adopt a conscious policy of regaining today’s States of Texas, California, Arizona, New Mexico and Colorado through immigration?
@Caleb: Swedish fertility rate was at its lowest at 1.5 in the 90s. The main reason was postponed entry into motherhood. It could have been cured by raising the retirement age (people are having children at a later age because of improvements in education and medical services, for these two reasons they can also work until a much later age – probably allowances need to be made for people doing heavy manual work, though), or lowering pensions, there was no need for third world – as you mention – asylum seekers.
I didn’t say that immigrants in general are a drain on the economy, especially not did I mention the US in that context. I mentioned Switzerland, and I mentioned a specific class of immigrants – those living on welfare. If the big corporations were pushing for immigration, then there would be no push for accepting asylum seekers, and there would be no pressure not to oust (usually legal) aliens living on welfare.
Just for those interested in Switzerland, and speaking some German, here’s some news on the great benefits of multiculturalism, of which the Swiss bigot Kari Z. was taught a lesson.
@Caleb: I personally don’t think that there’s a great Jewish conspiracy. It’s just Jews doing some ethnic networking (helping each other) in basically individualistic societies (that is, Western, including Russian, societies), and pursuing – for the most part subconsciously – their ethnic interests. Jews are the quintessential aliens, not having assimilated anywhere for thousands of years – so they somehow see their host societies as if they were newcomer immigrants, even if they had arrived hundreds of years before. And of course, such generalizations have some limits, so there will always be some exceptions.
But in the end it doesn’t matter whether there is or there isn’t a conspiracy, the bottom line is, that they will engage in activities which will in the long run inevitably be harmful to the host populations. Be it immigration, Marxism, Boasism, you name it. It will not necessarily be harmful because they want to destroy the host society (although in some cases no doubt that is a major motivation), or even weaken it (although in most cases that is probably a consideration), but because their interests diverge from the host society, and they pursue them regardless of the costs to the host society. Hence you have “Russian” oligarchs looting their “own” country – they didn’t want to destroy Russia, they just wanted to get rich. But, because they engaged in it without the slightest regard to the interests of the Russian people, they also nearly managed to raze Russia to the ground.
It’s not good to have such an intelligent (though short-sighted), aggressive and influential diaspora population, which is almost totally insensitive to the culture and interests of the host population.
@Gabor: “And that’s the difference,” as they say in the fight game, “between a Champ and a chump.” Or rather between growing up in a young and confident multi-ethnic society and in an ancient land of shrunken borders, riven with nationalist grievances and ethnic hatreds.
So, if Hungarians are unjustly criticized, only another Hungarian could ever come to their defense because nationality trumps justice, every time, is that how it works?
It doesn’t work that way here. Anyway, not entirely. The USA has defended Kosovars who are of no strategic value to us and aren’t even Christians. We defended Palestinian Arabs on the Lebanese cease-fire line against Israeli tanks and got blown up for our trouble.
Right about the time the Successor States were being created, including modern Hungary, President Wilson declared that he was proud that he was an idealist and America is an idealistic nation. The term had been meant as a criticism.
@Caleb: I wouldn’t go into those details. Either my comment was easy to misunderstand, or it wasn’t, but my main point probably didn’t come across.
Let’s try with a more neutral example. Let’s say you hear someone praising the Japanese. The Japanese are very talented, hardworking people, with a very high level of culture, etc. Now let’s suppose you don’t know much about Japan yourself. Will you believe it? Well, if the person praising the hardworking Japanese is a Brazilian or American, you might believe him. Not so much if he is himself Japanese. Capisce?
@Gabor: Whatever the small circle of nut jobs posting here may say, most Americans don’t think of themselves as a “host population”. Americans reject such ideas, have fought against them in the recent past.
Of course, Hitler and Goebbels wanted to portray Jews as a kind of alien bacillus so that the used clothing dealer in caftan and sidelocks could be lumped in with the Distinguished Professor of chemistry and winner of the Nobel Prize.
Are ALL the Russian oligarchs Jewish? A number were, others part Jewish but what of Tariko, the Vodka King, the banker Konanykhin who during Communist times was expelled from school for the “crime” of running a small side-business, or Prokhorov who bought himself a professional basketball team in New York? One hundred percent gentile, all of them.
If the Jewish oligarchs did not care about the Russian people, they didn’t care about the Jewish people, either. It’s rumored one (Berezovsky) tried to have another (Guzinsky) bumped off. In a country where the state had owned everything there is naturally going to be resentment of the rich by the poor even if their only “crime” was becoming wealthy by taking inefficient, overstaffed industries and applying classic business principles to make them pay.
Where they have been allowed to assimilate, which is to say most of the Protestant world, Jews have assimilated successfully and eagerly. In the USA the relatively small number of German-speaking Jews arriving before 1871 blended in American society quite nicely. Not a few took the final step of moving out of Judaism and adopting the Protestant faith. The much smaller number of Sephardic merchants who came to America with their families in colonial times assimilated so completely that there is nothing left of them.
It helped that these populations did not experience Czarist persecutions and often arrived with money. They were Jewish just as much as were the hundreds of thousands who poured in after 1890.
@Caleb:
Caleb may still try to convince us that he is not a Jew,the remarcable thing is that he always defends Jews whenever their misbehaviour is talked about.Even the notorious “Russian” oligarchs get his treatment of varm ethnic solidarity.Protecting Jews is obviously his main task as a Jewish troll.He simply cannot hide his Jewishness in his objectives,his way of talking and even his “humour”.There is a saying among Jews:”It is difficult to be a Jew”.Well for many Jews you could also say: “It is difficult to be a non-Jew”.Poor Caleb.
@Caleb:
Yeah Caleb , and you make a poor substitution .
I guess you fit the bill of the kind of poor intellect that is lacking enough to think that “the corporations” -and not an age old race/religion- is responsible for globalization .
That’s like saying Sears is responsible for Christmas .
Who was the driving force behind creating corporate law the capitalization of business , global trade agreements and immigration policy ?
Was it the frikkin eskimos ?
@Gabor: Are you being ironic? According to this article, Karl was just having a beer with a pal when these two Kosovars stole his taxi, cussed him out and shanked him near to death for no reason at all.
We have some trouble with Kosovar Albanians in the USA, too. However, they tend to inhabit urban neighborhoods that already are dominated by Italian organized crime, which both shelters them and keeps them in check.
@John hearns:
Hearns I agree. Caleb will never answer a direct question and hence shouldn’t be taken seriously. Its no longer an issue of discrepancies, but a vast chasm of fetishised conjecture appearing in his posts. Game Over
@John hearns: Well, it wasn’t Typhoid Mary (Mallon) and it wasn’t Urban IV.
Who knows who “invented” the shareholding corporation? You can start in the early 1600′s with the Dutch East India Company and go backward from there.
@Gabor: **Io capisco**.
I, too admire the **Nihon jin** though to them applies even more aptly what Bertold Brecht once said of the Germans: “Such beautiful music comes from your house! Yet when you approach, everyone reaches for his knife.”
The virtues of this people do not travel well. But they try again and again to export them.
If I were making general statements of praise about the Jews, statements which may be entirely true, both true and false or half-truths, like yours about the Japanese, my own personal background would be relevant. I hope, however that my statements are limited to specific and verifiable fact.
@Caleb:
Who knows who “invented” the shareholding corporation? You can start in the early 1600′s with the Dutch East India Company and go backward from there.
It was not about inventing . It was about who was the driving force towrds globalism with corporate gloabal capitalism and ONE vehicle ….. and yeah , who knows ? And we could go back even before Christ kicked the money changers out of the temple . I bet we could go back before the gold mongers of ancient Greece .
It’s timeless thing with the those “eskimos” and their money worshipping supremacist religion .
@Caleb:
And I would guess that you would not be a big believer in Christ . I would guess that you might well hate Christ with a religious fervor .
So , just treat the biblical money changer incident as a parable based on popular knowledge of the role played predominantly by the eskimos at that time period in history .
Think of it as just one of many of a very long term eskimo pattern that runs through much of history ….
You can start in the early 1600′s with the Dutch East India Company and go backward from there.
Interesting …
Were their very commercially active eskimos present in Holland at that time period ?
yeah , I believe there were .
@John hearns:
The eskimos had not been kicked out at particular time period . lol
@Enigmatic:
Hearns I agree. Caleb will never answer a direct question and hence shouldn’t be taken seriously. Its no longer an issue of discrepancies, but a vast chasm of fetishised conjecture appearing in his posts. Game Over
Yeah , the guy is not on the up and up . He’s not ” kosher ”
or is he ?! lol
@ moderator
On some forums , a poster can go back within a given time period to change any typos that had been made . That can be a useful feature !
@John hearns:
If the discussion is about the Jews being behind global capitalism and Caleb’s argument that this is not always the case ,pointing to the Dutch East India Company as an example,I have some interesting information to offer:
It is a well known fact that many Spanish-Portuguese Jews fled after their expulsion from the peninsula to the Netherlands.There they became wealthy and influencial traders.Many also invested in both the East and West India Companies.About the Dutch East india Company:(bold by me)
@Franklin Ryckaert: And that’s why they say “Jesus saves. Moses invests.”
PS: Peter Stuyvesant was a man of many prejudices. He also wanted to exclude “papists” from the New Amsterdam colony. Though it was not a “multinational” in the modern sense, it was for sound business reasons that the directors of the West India Company decided that the (Sephardic) Jews would remain.
It also made these Jews among the oldest of old-stock Americans, pre-dating the English.
I think the whole thing boils down to the fact that jews are driven by money . It is a shallow existence of simple lust for materialism that somehow perpetuates these people . There is a drive within jews that is like a scourge on all peoples of the earth . It is something that the rest of humanity can not comprehend , simply because they don’t get it .
Basically , jews are money lusting psychos . Dress them up in any other way and it is still that one drive that is primary to their spirit , and what a sickly spirit it is .
@Gabor: Thanks, Gabor – insightful and convincing post.
@Caleb: Caleb, I know many Americans. I know commenters here are not typical. But even without talking to a single American, I would know that from both the commenters and the authors, who both express their dismay at the views of the rest of Americans regarding both the Jews and anybody else. And even without this site, I would have access to the rest of the internet, not to mention several books etc. So I know these views are not typical among Americans.
BTW, my views are not typical in Hungary either. Just in case you might get some false impressions.
@John hearns: True Christians recognize the debt owed to the People of the Book. That is why the lapsed Catholic Hitler planned to hang the Pope in full Pontificals in St. Peter’s Square. That is why the lapsed Catholic Himmler, having rejected “Jewish” Christianity, had to invent a new religion for his SS with pre-Christian symbols and ceremonies and a pantheon of pagan gods.
@Lancashire lad:
“Foucault’s early writings (Histoire de la Folie) are in fact quite close to Kevin Macdonald’s position, as I understand it, as both think of culture as something manipulated by an elite, more than (or as well as) a distinterested pursuit of truth. “
Given I am reading in translation, essentially I am putting trust in the translator. However my interpretation of Foucault, is not that culture is solely manipulated by an elite, rather that elites manipulate aspects of culture that are generated by society as a whole.
“I think Macdonald derives this ultimately from Marx (he is a former 60s Marxist) whereas for Foucault it comes from Nietzsche’s theory of the will to power. Hence according to Foucault ideas of rationality were (supposedly) imposed through the institution of the madhouse in the 18th century through the will to power of a post-medieval rationalist elite.”
From my reading Foucault not so much argues that ideas of Madness and Rationality were imposed, but emerged as a function of the power of elites, a power to some extent given them by the rest of society, as ideas of ‘possession’ by evil spirits were overturned by emerging secularism.
“However, another ingredient in Professor Macdonald’s synthesis is his endorsement of evolutionary and empirical psychology as neutral sciences,”
Which isn’t strictly speaking true, consensus over evolutionary science is not sufficient to define as neutral, and given the complexity of the themes under examination, claims to neutrality in psychology are tenuous at best. There are themes present, e.g. IQ, altruism, agression, however the validity of strategies for testing and evaluation of such themes, are under enormous pressure. Personally I think that the apparent ascendancy of Wilson’s approach to socio-biology is likely to be temporary at best, as the implications of complexity and systems theory unfold, certainly anthropologists are at odds with his theories of multi-level selection.
“by which some cultural manipulations typical of multicultural societies can be identified.
I am not entirely sure I understand your intended meaning, I think partly since it intends to imply that some societies are either non-manipulative, which I think is untenable, or less manipulative than others, which would probably require a 5000 word essay to disentangle to any degree.
Cultural manipulation is a fact of life, themes such as multi-culturalism seek to ameliorate the worst effects of such manipulation, unfortunately if anything is to be changed for better or worse it must be manipulated.
“Of these he has selected the three threads of Culture of Critique as instances. Rather than finding his ideas laughable – though there is an element of humour in realising how one has been taken in and the skill of those who accomplished the feat – I find them interesting but incomplete.”
Or we might be amused at just how paranoid MacDonald sounds. His polemic on Freud for instance is almost as amusing as Fraud himself.
“What is needed is an account of European culture with a firmer empirical basis. Perhaps on that subject, we are in agreement, if on little else.”
Which European Culture? What are it’s boundaries? By what criteria is it to be defined as European? Who is qualified to identify any of the parameters by which a culture should be defined?
The problem is that Cultures evolve, the track of their evolution is not linear, and it is multivariate, so we might look at European Culture in the 1400s as essentially a Christian Catholic culture, but miss completely the folk belief of the culture of northern England, which whilst some ways similar to the folk belief of Czechoslovakia, in others is radically different. How might we interpret the influence of Islam on European Culture, might we define it as non European and exclude Spain as a non-European country do to the heavy Islamic influence in Spanish culture. Might we identify Magna Carta as a Islamic inspired document and bring into question the basis of English Law, and the nearest thing to a constitution England possesses.
“On the holocaust revisionist point that you raise, you might be interested in former Buchenwald inmate Paul Rassinier’s writings. These show that the idea of revising WW2 history long predates the imminent or recent demise of the survivors.”
Oh there have been murmurings for a long time, mostly from the sources that might be expected. but none had significant currency, such ideas have only attained any prominence in recent years. I don’t find Rassinier particularly convincing, he misuses Jean Norton Cru for one thing. I suspect Rassinier had a dark secret, that pretty much tore him up psychologically speaking, possibly related to his time in the camps, his writings give the impression of someone running from something, searching as he goes for the one gem/key/talisman that will release him from the fate he has assigned himself.
“I agree that such investigations can be done irresponsibly and inadequately and for unworthy motives, but taking the trouble to read some recent criticisms of the holocaust theory, I’ve been surprised at their general cogency, though I don’t accept them wholesale. This issue of course doesn’t seem to be a particular focus of this site.”
Personally what I have read of ‘the Holocaust didn’t happen theories’ beggars belief, as a whole they appear to demand that the reader accept a vast conspiracy in the midst of war, and the demonstrable eugenic beliefs and practices of the Nazis of such outlandish proportions as to be ludicrous. There is a preponderance of evidence so large that the ‘boxing day tsunami’ was a rumour by comparison.
“Anyway, it will be good to hear more from you on other threads if the online invective doesn’t dissuade you. There’s nothing like a lively debate
No point preaching to the choir.
@Enigmatic:
“Sophie, thanks for highlighting the subjective nature of theory. I would add some of my own favorites including Sayeed, Geertz and Bourdieu.”
The point is: for any approximation of objectivity to be attained, subjectivity has to be acknowledged,
“-The only problem remains that:
Whilst existing in this post-modern paradigm of tolerance and subjectivity YOU claim to have the “truth” and thereby refuse to accomodate evidence running contrary to your “faith.””
My only ‘faith’ is in the existence of an external reality, everything else is probability built on probability linked to available evidence. The problem for me is that as yet no one has offered up any evidence against a multi-cultural, perspective, a lot of rhetoric, but no evidence.
“Sophie states:
1.”Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is still the truth.” Wow Sophie, if you have the truth why quote “theory” to support your truth?lol”
Er what other truth is there than theory/hypothesis?
“2. Sophie’s stated truth: “Multiculturalism works because it is based in real science, ie, it proposes a hypothesis, which stands until refuted by evidence, after which it reformulates a new hypothesis, accommodating the newly discovered evidence.” Umm no it doesn’t. Multicult is dogma for you and the rest of your ilk and under the extreme weight of evidence against it, you steadfastly march forward to the beat of it’s racist, destructive drum. “
Where is the ‘extreme weight of evidence against it‘? Cite me something substantial, since what follows represents at best the opinions of three politicians, not a class of people noted for the veracity of their statements, opinion is not evidence, and this is all your chosen quartet offer.
“-And you say, “Multi-cult will change when the evidence shows that it needs change.” Ok, here’s my evidence proving the paradigm needs revision:
WESTERN LEADERS STATE: MULTICULTURALSIM IS DEAD
-French President Nicolas Sarkozy states: “We have been too concerned about the identity of the immigrant and not enough about the identity of the country that was receiving him.””
And Sarkozy would lose to the Socialists in a presidential election by 20%, based on the most recent Polls. Quite apart from Sarkozy, frankly being a clown.
“German Chancellor Angela Merkel states that multiculturalism is “an absolute failure.” ”
Interesting isn’t it how Germany’s greens who coined the Multikulti phrase in the German context, are challenging for the top spot in the next government, and experiencing the most buoyant position they have ever had in the German polls.
“Horst Seehofer, the leader of the Bavarian Christian-Democrats, was even more outspoken. “Multiculturalism is dead.””
And who’s showing in Junes election was 17% points down on their previous result, which was partly attributed to this statement by local commentators.
“-British Prime Minister David Cameron blamed multiculturalism for Islamic extremism. “We have allowed the weakening of our collective identity,” he said. “Under the doctrine of state multiculturalism, we have encouraged different cultures to live […] apart from the mainstream.””
For one thing in the same speech he said “Building a stronger sense of national and local identity holds “the key to achieving true cohesion” by allowing people to say “I am a Muslim, I am a Hindu, I am a Christian, but I am a Londoner… too”, “ which sounds like multiculturalism to me. Secondly there is an issue to address about empowering non-native speakers to engage directly within the culture they have joined, so I do think a required minimum standard of English would be advisable for their benefit, which has always been a tenant of multiculturalism anyway.
“-So now that Multi-cult has been weighed, measured, and found wanting, lets wait for a new theory which respects the rights of people to live with their own ethnic groups on their own terms.”
Not according to the electorates in the relevant nations, who’s leaders you have chosen to cite.
“-Because you yourself have stated that “people are entitled to live whatever way they want.” So we WHITES wish to live together as exemplified in the Japanese model of homogeneity. Case closed.”
Who said Japan is a Homogenous culture? The academic literature seems to consider the whole idea a myth. Certainly Japan has a relatively small immigrant population, however it has grown 40% since 1992, currently at about 2% of the population, a little under half that in the UK, and it is projected to grow considerably in the future, particularly in the wake of the recent Earthquake. Another factor to consider of course is that Japan essentially abandoned its indigenous culture in the 1950’s, in favour of a partly imagined American culture and spent a good deal of the 1990’s rediscovering Japaneseness, and has essentially ended up with an amalgam of the two. This is a recurring theme in Japanese history, periodically abandoning their culture almost entirely, and then rediscovering it in a new form after a few decades or centuries before going through the cycle again. They Did it with Chinese culture in the 16th century, and then again with British Culture in the late 19th century and then with American Culture in the 1950’s.
“-But actually, you are in agreement with my argument as you state “Where is it written in multiculturalism that any particular culture should give up it’s identity?”
-Exactly Sophie and I wish this were the case. But for some reason Whites have been forced to give up our ethnic identity “
When was that then I didn’t notice? In fact from my perspective indigenous cultures are experiencing a resurgence. Certainly now the ‘supremacy’ of English authority has been diluted. Language is a good indicator: For instance the Welsh language is making a significant comeback after a century of attempted suppression by English authority in Wales. From about 10,000 speakers in 1950 to more than 300,000 today. There is now even a Scottish language channel, and the Irish are as always doing well in celebrating their culture,
“while watching people of color doggedly celebrate their ethnic heritage in the forms of La Raza, Adl, JDL, ACLU. A little hypocritical perhaps?”
Which puts you in the US I think. I still don’t see where this has forced descendents of European immigrants there from celebrating and owning their cultures? In truth the purest immigrant culture in the US is predominantly white as far as I am aware, The Amish seem to be doing fine. If you are American, perhaps you are merely expressing a sense of detachment from your heritage, why not try to track down your anscestors, find out who they were, it might help you realise who you are?
“-And according to Merkel, Sarkozy, and David Cameron, Multi-culturalism is the culprit forcing us to give up our culture and identity while people of color celebrate theirs.”
I think that David Cameron is too confused on the issue to be taken too seriously, Merkel was clearly attempting to find a chink in the Green’s armour (and failing) and seems to have dropped the issue subsequently: Sarkozy, well Sarkozy is definitely last years news.
“- So I don’t really understand your piety in defending multi-cult. Do you pray to multi-cult at night asking for protection and blessings?”
From your writing you seem as if you have been reading creationists criticism of evolution. If you wish to persuade me provide me with real evidence of a problem, and not anxiety about a perceived problem. Who has told you not to celebrate Christmas? Where are the Edicts telling you, you can’t eat your favourite foods? Where is it written you cannot attend a Christian church? What laws exist determining who you can and cannot call friend?
“Because you really come off as a religious zealot refusing to incoporate evidence running contrary to your faith. “
Provide some evidence then?
Re Jews and Comerce:
Er what do you expect when society (For which read Catholic Church)excludes a group of people from everything that might make them serious money, except (Paradoxicaly) Money Lending for the best part of a thousand years.
@Caleb: Your Jewish ‘God’ is pure PAGANISM and therefore does not belong in Europe and to its native peoples.
Indeed, Judaism is predicated upon the worship of Saturn; hence its preoccupation with the colour black. The “Wailing Wall” is simply self-worshipping theatre.
Try to remember this the next time you attempt to accuse the Third Reich (in your ignorance) of ‘creating’ a pagan religion.
@Anglo Saxon: The **Saturnalia** was a Roman festival. Or do you think, in your manifestly deluded state, that Jews worship a discontinued brand of General Motors automobiles?
@Sophie Miller:
Re Jews and Comerce:
Er what do you expect when society (For which read Catholic Church)excludes a group of people from everything that might make them serious money, except (Paradoxicaly) Money Lending for the best part of a thousand years.
Hahahahaha !
You’re such a joker . It’s good to see you have an absurd sense for humor .
yah , those bad catholics made the poor sweet and innocent jews corner the market on usury . The Jews just needed to make some ” serious money ” !!
Thanks for the good laugh , you’re such a clown !
@Caleb:
@John hearns: True Christians recognize the debt owed to the People of the Book. That is why the lapsed Catholic Hitler planned to hang the Pope in full Pontificals in St. Peter’s Square. That is why the lapsed Catholic Himmler, having rejected “Jewish” Christianity, had to invent a new religion for his SS with pre-Christian symbols and ceremonies and a pantheon of pagan gods.
Hahahhahahaha ! I see you two share the same sense of humor .
Yeah , the Christians sure are indebted to the self chosen ones ! That’s the Jewish forte ! They have a way of building vast amounts of indebtedness . It’s such a endearing quality that even Christ said ” blessed are the usurers ! ” Or was it that Christ said jews are ” vipers” or ” satans children” ?
And I love your comic book satire of those evil Nazis .
Hang the pope in Peter’s square ? Such an imagination . Do you write scripts for spielbergawitz ?!
Yeah that Adolf was a naughty boy ! unlike those sweet innocent Jews !
Thanks for the knee slapper , you are such a clown !
@ Sophie Miller
You throw out a suggestion that your problems with grammar and syntax is related to Dyslexia. I must say that I have some difficulty with that. The Dyslexics that I know aren’t even in the same book, never mind on the same page, when it comes to your verbosity.
As for the “British Empire”, these were economic conquests by Jewish owned Companies, such as the East India Company, using the British Army and Navy to “open” markets. Some things never change.
If you were truly who you say you are, you would know that the destruction of the trade guilds was done for the “merchants”, i.e. the Jews. This went hand in hand with wresting the control of the economy out of English hands and placing it in the hands of the bankers and merchants – Jews. Cromwell was funded by Jews, as was William of Orange. What we see today in Britain is the result of a centuries old war against the people of the British Isles.
Your view of multiculturalism does not reflect that fact that as far back as Elizabeth I, foreigners, and particularly foreigners of colour, were not welcome in the British Isles.
I do accept, as likely, your viewpoint regarding some Aryan make up of the original inhabitants. With that in mind, it would seem perfectly natural for “British” Aryans to emulate those who came from Northern India. They wanted to subjugate/subdue/separate from/kill the “dark ones”.
In that light, you could be called a subversive to your own kind.
I see things much more simplistically: species compete. Cedar waxwings compete with Bohemian waxwings for food and space. They are virtually the same bird, but with different coloured markings. They do not interbreed. Lions and cheetahs compete. Both are cats, but they don’t interbreed. The different species of zebras don’t interbreed while they compete for food, water, and space. Most of the tribes in Africa defend their space and stick to their own. The same can be said for South American Indian tribes, and before the re-conquest of North America by whites, the Indian tribes here were hostile to each other and the Inuit. Some still are.
Why then, is it wrong for the original people of Europe to want to protect their territory and genetic lines? These things are hard wired in any species. It is only psycho babble and propaganda by Jews that has changed this.
There is a David Duke video that has a film clip of a Jewess stating that Europeans will not be allowed to have their monolithic societies, and that Jews are at the forefront. I think that proves MacDonald’s theory.
@Curmudgeon:
“You throw out a suggestion that your problems with grammar and syntax is related to Dyslexia. I must say that I have some difficulty with that. The Dyslexics that I know aren’t even in the same book, never mind on the same page, when it comes to your verbosity.”
Perhaps they should use grammar checkers, they speed things up enormously. Not to mention that the profile of dyslexia, varies enormously between individuals, mine happens to be spelling and grammar. I have bits of paper and everything, even got a grant for a PC at uni.
“As for the “British Empire”, these were economic conquests by Jewish owned Companies, such as the East India Company,“
Wasn’t the East India Company Charter granted by Elizabeth I, now what was it she did to Jews in England, Oh yes persecute them and expel them.
“using the British Army and Navy to “open” markets. Some things never change.”
Well if you believe that hogwash they certainly don’t. I certainly can’t think of any reference that identifies Sir Richard Arkwright as a jew and he and his family benefited more from the opening up of world markets than any one else I can think of, since by the end of his life his mills had produced enough cotton cloth to clothe the entire worlds population at the time about twice over.
“If you were truly who you say you are, you would know that the destruction of the trade guilds was done for the “merchants”, i.e. the Jews. “
Who says? Was Arkwright Jewish? Was Stephenson Jewish? How about Boulton and Watt?
Arkwright certainly benefited more from the destruction of guilds than anyone else, and was one of the richest men in England (£500,000) when he died. There was a close association between him and William Cavendish who was probably richer (best reference is annual income of £75,000 a year) but the nominal landowner where Arkwright built his mills. One of the reasons the Dukes of Devonshire stayed rich whilst a lot of others didn’t was their association with cotton.
“This went hand in hand with wresting the control of the economy out of English hands and placing it in the hands of the bankers and merchants – Jews. Cromwell was funded by Jews,”
Cromwell was funded by whosoever paid him protection money. Puritans were basically Gangsters. A bit like the Tudors in that respect.
“as was William of Orange. What we see today in Britain is the result of a centuries old war against the people of the British Isles.”
Not a very successful war then.
“Your view of multiculturalism does not reflect that fact that as far back as Elizabeth I, foreigners, and particularly foreigners of colour, were not welcome in the British Isles.”
Untrue: there were plenty of foreigners in Britain, and plenty who were black Just look at the paintings. Elizabeth only expelled the Jews. As many as 30% of the sailors in British ports were from North Africa, who the hell do you think told the slavers where to get the slaves from? Just because they were disenfranchised doesn’t mean they were not here.
“I do accept, as likely, your viewpoint regarding some Aryan make up of the original inhabitants. With that in mind, it would seem perfectly natural for “British” Aryans to emulate those who came from Northern India. They wanted to subjugate/subdue/separate from/kill the “dark ones”.”
Elucidate your reference.
“In that light, you could be called a subversive to your own kind.”
Er why?
“I see things much more simplistically: species compete. Cedar waxwings compete with Bohemian waxwings for food and space. They are virtually the same bird, but with different coloured markings. They do not interbreed. Lions and cheetahs compete. Both are cats, but they don’t interbreed. The different species of zebras don’t interbreed while they compete for food, water, and space. Most of the tribes in Africa defend their space and stick to their own.”
Hmm, I seem to recall that African tribes tended to have these huge get-togethers where several tribes would meet, mostly for the purposes of getting youngsters together, who would then move tribes at the end of the gatherings. But also for exchanges of ideas and News. Modern national boundaries mostly put an end to it, and the great intertribal conflicts appear to have started in the twentieth century for the most part. Hmm I wonder who taught them that?
“The same can be said for South American Indian tribes, and before the re-conquest”
? Your not claiming 50 Norsemen on a beach in Newfoundland as a conquest are you?
“of North America by whites, the Indian tribes here were hostile to each other and the Inuit. Some still are.”
Hmm, how hostile? How many wars? I seem to recall that a lot of indigenous Americans conflicts with each other were show conflicts ,which bore more relation to contact sports than real ‘wars’ as such. There were specific rivalries, but in comparison to the wars Europeans tended to enact against each other they were somewhat trivial in comparison.
“Why then, is it wrong for the original people of Europe to want to protect their territory and genetic lines? “
Because thinking in those terms is very un-evolved. Personally I think I am a somewhat more advanced species than a waxwing, or a lion, and it works against the interests of the species as a whole. And because it represents applying a survival strategy relevant to the 15th century to a context in which it no longer applies, and which in all probability never really applied in the first place, except possibly in the minds of some elites. Oh and EO Wilson wouldn’t like it.
“These things are hard wired in any species. “
Evolution doesn’t support this quite the way you think, in fact it is very easy to make an argument that evolution represent’s a progression away from this, and that it flies in the face of the interests of the selfish gene. Check up on how Chimpanzees relate to each other.
“It is only psycho babble and propaganda by Jews that has changed this.”
And there was me thinking you were going to blame all that LDS in the sixties.
“There is a David Duke video that has a film clip of a Jewess stating that Europeans will not be allowed to have their monolithic societies, and that Jews are at the forefront. I think that proves MacDonald’s theory. “
Hmm one voice?
All this makes me wonder how you ended up feeling such a victim?
@John hearns: The following text was sung in public by the Hitler Youth at the 1934 Nuremberg Party Rally:
We are the jolly Hitler Youth,
We don’t need any Christian truth
For our Leader Adolf Hitler, our Leader
Always is our Interceder.
Whatever the Papist priests may try,
We’re Hitler’s children until we die;
We follow not Christ but Horst Wessel.
Away with incense and Holy Water vessel!
I’m not a Christian, nor a Catholic,
I go with the SA through thin and thick.
[source: Wulf, Joseph, **Literatur und Dichtung im Dritten Reich: Eine Dokumentation**
A freakin song sung by some kids at a pep rally .
There’s that absurd sense of humor again .
@Caleb: Excellent my little puppy dog. I see we have you well trained at last. Now give us the tune to those wise words — Away with incense and Holy Water vessel! — while wagging your little caleb tail, and we Euros shall sing it again, and again, until it climbs your Jewd (rhymes with “lewd”) MTV charts.
@Anglo Saxon:
To depict Nazism as a kind of neo-pagan, anti-Christian or even anti-Catholic movement intent on “hanging the pope” is ridiculous.Most of the Nazi leadership was devoutly Christian, often Catholic.For information go to http://www.liberalslikechrist.org/catholic/nazileadership.html.Only Rosenberg and Borman were non-Christian.Citing a song of the Hitler Youth doesn’t prove anything.Hitler made pacts with both the Catholics (“concordat”) and the Protestants (“German Christians”).As for “true Christians recognizing the debt to the People of the Book”,ah… the People of the Book!How much did “recognition” by Christians benefit them in the last 2000 years?Not much! Christianity was pretty much an anti-Jewish religion most of its history.Only recently has it become pro-Jewish due to Jewish infiltration.And that is what you are trying to do here,driving a wedge between Nazism and Christianity. Sorry,but they were closely cooperating,to the detriment of the “people of the Book”.How sad!
@Franklin Ryckaert: I fear you have read far too much into my previous comment … although having said that, it is true I have made it abundantly clear in several comments associated with earlier TOO articles that I believe Christianity to be “Judaism Light” and thus subversive to Europe’s self-identity.
I have never studied the relationship between established Christianity in Germany and NASDP in any detail. It would appear you presently know far more than I about this issue.
I plead “Not guilty” Sir! I never knowingly advanced this notion. It does not reflect what I believe.
Furthermore, those who are familiar with my earlier contributions know I never use the words “Nazi” or “Nazism” in any of my writings, except when obliged to simply because I am quoting others. These are false and ultimately meaningless words, dreamt up and then popularized first by the Anglo-Jewish faggots inhabiting London and its environs, and then (post 1943) by legions of American pseudo-intellectuals and their New York Jew minders, all combined with the corrupting power of Hollywood.
I misread one of your comments a couple of months back, fired a verbal ‘broadside’ at you, and have tried ever since to apologize indirectly by being supportive of you.
You have now misread one of my comments.
We are both passionately committed to the cause of our people, and we both hold strong opinions about certain key issues. I would also like to believe we are both principled men.
So no hard feelings from my side Franklin. These are testing times for most of us. Please be assured I have no wedge in my hand … but that does not mean I am willing to subscribe to the questionable view that “more Christianity” is the answer to our problems and dilemmas.
If Christianity has indeed been thoroughly infiltrated by Jews and Judaism (I thoroughly agree with you on this point) then I would politely suggest to you that the ONLY appropriate response is to return to our pre-Christian roots (which were noble and healthy, and in tune with the natural world) and have done with this 2,000 year old destructive Abrahamic nonsense.
@Anglo Saxon:
Anglo Saxon,sorry for creating the wrong impression that I blame you for anything.My last reply to your comment was meant as some correcting information about the idea that the Nazis wanted to abolish Christianity and even “hang the pope”.That idea was not yours,it was Caleb’s,but since you were reacting to that idea and your reaction was the last in a series of comments on it,I directed my information to you,thus creating the misunderstanding that I blame you for anything,which is not the case.My sincere apology.
As for an eventual conflict between WN and Christianity,this is a problem that needs some serious discussion.Perhaps something for later.
Regards.Franklin Ryckaert.