If there’s one characteristic that defines the European nationalist parties, it is that they have eschewed racialist rhetoric in favor of cultural arguments. Geert Wilders, Marine LePen, et al. have claimed that Islam is incompatible with Western culture—that Muslims refuse to assimilate and have values that are incompatible with Western modernity, particularly on women and sexuality.
Without doubt this tactic has made nationalist parties more acceptable to mainstream voters and more difficult to attack by the left. It is not possible to tar these parties with the ultimate post-WWII pejorative—”Nazi—which is sure to come up if one breathes a word about ethnic interests of Whites.
Now Stephen Walt, of Israel Lobby fame, attempts to undercut cultural conservative arguments that he associates with Breivik—“the idea that he is defending some fixed and sacred notion of the ‘Christian West,’ which is supposedly under siege by an aggressive alien culture” (“Breivik’s Warped Worldview“). (He’d doubtless disapprove even more of Breivik’s Nordicist proclivities.)
In my review of The Israel Lobby, I made the following point about Western elites:
Confronted with the moral critique of America emanating from elite universities and the media, the old Protestant intellectual establishment quickly yielded the high ground. Many of them became avid cheerleaders of the new multicultural zeitgeist that rejected the America and even the Americanism of their ancestors, to the point that the new zeitgeist has become a consensus among elites of all stripes. They accepted their own demographic decline, and they gave up their pretensions as cultural leaders and trend setters. And they implicitly paved the way for their eventual loss of political power to other groups, some of which have historically conditioned grudges against them—a dangerous situation to say the least. In doing so, they became the pallbearers for their own people.
Sadly, this applies to Stephen Walt. In the current main TOO article, Charles Dodgson does an excellent job of refuting Walt’s moral indictments of the West. Right now I am reviewing Ricardo Duchesne’s The Uniqueness of Western Civilization—a book that I strongly recommend for intellectuals like Walt. Duchesne, a sociologist at the University of New Brunswik, is fond of showing how the critics of the West typically presuppose ideas whose origins are uniquely Western.
For example, in discussing the anti-Western attitudes of Franz Boas (one of my least favorite intellectuals), Duchesne notes,
there is … an unavoidable paradox contained in the very historical origins of cultural relativism, for its roots lie in the uniquely Western idea that there is a universal humanity. Starting with the Stoic cosmopolitan idea that each person is a member of a common cosmos, through to the Christian idea that all humans irrespective of local, ethnic or cultural origin were created by the same God, to the 16th-century idea that humans have a ‘natural’ rights-bearing disposition to life, liberty, and dignity, the West has long cultivated the notion of a universal humanity. (p. 31)
Even more pointedly, in his discussion of the fad among historians for a “blinkered, anti-Western” world history, Duchesne notes that
the trend toward a more even-handed evaluation of non-European peoples, initiated by Western scholars in the first half of the 20th century deserves to be acknowledged. It is, after all, a trend in character with the ideals of human rights and dignity advanced by European civilization. (p. 53; emphasis in text)
There is nothing in Breivik’s writings to suggest that he thinks that Western culture is “fixed.” Even a cursory glance at Western history indicates an extraordinary internal dynamism. Western culture has indeed been open to outside influences, but Duchesne notes that
the rise of this culture cannot be abstracted from the special developmental history of the Greek and Roman assemblies of citizens; the parliaments, municipal communes, universities, and estates of the medieval era; the reading societies, salons, journals and newspapers of the Enlightenment; the political parties, trade unions, and nationalist groups of the 19th century. … At the heart of Western modernity … is the ideal of freedom, and the ideal of a critical, self-reflexive public culture. (pp. 237–238)
Moreover, just because Western culture is not fixed and is open to outside influences does not mean that factors internal to Western civilization are not critical. In searching for the dynamism of the West, ultimately a great weight must be given to internal factors. This uniqueness comes down to the Western proclivity to individualism and its correlatives: the simple household, monogamy, exogamy, relative lack of ethnocentrism, relatively high position of women, moral universalism, science, and individual rights against the state—in my view a legacy of our history as northern hunter-gatherers. But of course, any appeal to evolved ethnic tendencies is anathema to contemporary academic elites in the West—a phenomenon that is, ironically perhaps, itself the result of ethnic conflict initiated and maintained by hostile and aggrieved ethnic outsiders.
And given the ethnic origins of the West, ethnic aliens are indeed a threat. Walt writes as if Breivik has no rational reason to be worried that 4% of the people living in Norway are Muslims. But all the projections indicate Muslims will be a majority in many European countries later this century. To suppose that European civilization can survive such a transformation is folly indeed. There is no culture where Islam dominates that has any of the characteristics of Western modernism mentioned above. As I am sure Walt would acknowledge, Western nation-building in the Middle East has been an abject failure; the West has had absolutely no success in implanting liberal culture in any part of the Muslim world. The Arab Spring is rapidly devolving into an Islamic nightmare.
The same may be said for African cultures where, for example, South Africa is steadily descending into barbarism, invidious nepotism, political authoritarianism, poverty, slavery, and lawlessness that characterize the rest of sub-Saharan Africa.
I completely understand why European nationalist parties and Breivik wish to frame the struggle in terms of cultural conflict given the post-WWII intellectual climate of hostility toward evolutionary and biological thinking. Nor do I expect intellectuals like Stephen Walt to be sensitive to arguments that massive non-White immigration inevitably lowers the Darwinian fitness of the traditional peoples of Western immigrant-receiving countries.
In addition to declines in IQ, there is clearly natural selection against the Danish gene pool in general [resulting from non-Danish immigration]. That is, at the same time that Darwinian natural selection has been relaxed for IQ, immigration (especially non-Western immigration) has resulted in intense natural selection against Danes as an ethnic group, with the result that in the long run they will be displaced entirely. That is, if we continue these population projections well beyond 2072 when ethnic Danish births are projected to be 33% of the total births in Denmark, the births to ethnic Danes will become a vanishingly small percentage of the total births and there will be selection against genetic combinations unique to Northern Europe. For example, the genes underlying Nordic appearance … would become less and less common. This is Darwinian selection with a vengeance. (See here)
Clearly it is in the ethnic interests of Europeans to prevent their biological displacement.
However, even if one takes a completely cultural viewpoint, there is no reason for optimism. Walt writes that compared to people like Breivik, he has “greater confidence in the inherent strengths of a liberal society.”
I don’t. Any Whites who think that the liberal culture of the West with its roots in the European Enlightenment will persist when Whites become a minority are dreaming (see above_.
One might frame it in terms of a variation on Pascal’s Wager: A rational person should behave as though biological tendencies are critical for the construction of European culture(s) and therefore act to prevent large-scale immigration that could tip the demographic balance against Europeans. This is because Europeans have everything to lose if there is any possibility that allowing the traditional peoples of the West to become minorities in the societies they founded will result in disaster for Europeans at the hands of peoples with historical grudges against them or will result in the demise of liberal European political institutions—particularly personal freedoms which are completely absent in the Muslim world and foreign to Africa.
If we are indeed witnessing the demise of the West, as there is every reason to believe, elite intellectuals like Walt will bear a very large portion of the blame.
Facing the Future as a Minority
We’re not “witnessing” the demise of the West. Wrong tense of the verb. Our grandparents witnessed it, past tense. No offense, KMac, but you and all post-war defenders of some region known as “the West” are just the twitching toe on a corpse. The European, the Aryan, whatever, died long ago. This is mop up time. You have no ethnic or cultural cohesion. You control no power nodes, nor can you. It’s impossible for you to create wealth without it being siphoned away. Other ethnic groups make the decision now whether you stay or go.
Thank you, Anglos of the world.
Dear Professor MacDonald,
I see you continually refer to so-called “historical grudges” that tribalist groups hold against European-derived men and women. (For example, you’ve used “grudge” twice in the interest column you have just posted.)
Your phrasing gives these tribal racists too much credibility. Webster’s defines “grudge” as a strong feeling of hostility or ill will toward someone over a real or fancied a grievance. I believe that the primary meaning of the word is in fact connected to a real grievance. As a result, the word grudge can connote a sense of legitimate grievance over something real–even if the feeling of ongoing hostility may be considered imprudent, unfair, unnecessary, harmful, etc. Your use of the qualifier “historical” also tends to give “grudge” this “real grievance” meaning, as if we had in fact done something in the past that might have merited this hostility. At best, your phrasing implies that the hostility is based on a fancied grievance, but still a grievance, still some kind of valid basis (even if fancied).
This phrasing is an inaccurate and unwise concession to those who harbor ill will toward the diverse white Americans. It treads dangerously close to conceding moral high ground. The ongoing efforts by racist tribes to dominate, subjugate, or replace white Americans from their country rarely even have at their base even a “fancied” grievance. What we are facing is pure racial hatred and jealousy–because they covet our territory, because they see us as rivals for resources and jobs, because they want our pretty toys.
It seems like you could say the same thing about Stephen Walt and other anti-Zionists: it’s difficult to attack Jewish power without being demonized as a Nazi, so they frame their criticisms of Jews in terms that are considered acceptable. If we assume Breivik’s statements that he is “anti-racist, pro-Israel, and pro-homosexual” are “just for cover”, then why not consider that Walt’s pro-multiculturalism statements might be serving a similar purpose? Does anyone seriously believe that his book The Israel Lobby would be in every bookstore in the country if he were an open racialist?
If the choice really comes down to either focusing on race or focusing on Jews but not both, it seems the sensible thing to do is focus on the latter. Get to the root of the problem. Once Jewish influence has been removed or greatly reduced, dealing with immigration and other such issues will be trivial. There won’t be any need for “civic nationalist” strategies.
It seems silly to think that these Jew-led anti-Muslim movements are going to do much good for White people. Robert Spencer (a major target in Walt’s article), for instance wrote an entire book, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam, in which he never once suggested that Muslim immigration should be restricted, despite devoting an entire chapter on “what should be done” about the Islamic problem. Geert Wilders is certainly mostly motivated by his support for Israel (as evidenced by his having spent time on a kibbutz at a young age), not any desire to defend White Europeans, which is not surprising since he is not a full-blooded White himself, no matter how much bleach he puts in his hair. Then there’s the fact that Breivik’s own target wasn’t a pro-immigration rally, but an anti-Israel rally, which strongly suggests that his pro-Israel statements were more than “just for cover”. So are the anti-Islam guys using Israel to defend Europeans, or using nationalistic Europeans to defend Israel? I think it’s obvious who the sucker at the table is.
What helped in making Western culture different, I think, was the cutting loose, by the ancient Greeks, of philosophy from religion. Outside the West, it seems to me, one’s religion is pretty much one’s philosophy. Immigrants to the West are now begged, by people who claim to be multiculturalists, to separate their philosophical views from their religion.
@stick:
The European, the Aryan, whatever, died long ago.
When and how did the European, the Aryan die?
You have no ethnic or cultural cohesion.
Why not? When did we have this cohesion?
You control no power nodes, nor can you.
What are the power nodes? Who controls them? And why can’t Americans control them?
It’s impossible for you to create wealth without it being siphoned away.
How is that? Why is that?
Thank you, Anglos of the world.
Why are you thanking Anglos? What did they do? What are they responsible for?
Professor Macdonald has surpassed himself in this article. That Pascal’s Wager analogy has an intelligence I’ve not known in his writing before. Sometimes it’s almost as if a higher being were speaking through him.
@stick:
Your pessimism in not appreciated; I’m willing to wager that you are not familiar with Western Tragedies. Another unique quality of Western Culture.
Kevin,
You and everyone else on the “alternative right” are going about this the wrong way. You need to start by empirically re-establishing the importance of biological race. One way to do this would be to establish that there are, in fact, congenital differences in behavioral traits such as IQ between some populations and then work from there. Or find some other socially important difference to give your arguments about the importance of race a foothold. I find it incredible that you and others argue about race differences without establishing them – or even defending various hypothesis. Few accept your position because the empirical support for it is weak. It’s weak because few defend it and even fewer present new empirical support for it.
@Chuck:
You IQists or better said eugenecists are going about the wrong way:
1. Your emphasis on IQ leads to acceptance of certain amount of asian/indian migration to white countries and insults a large chunk of patriotic/hardworking/creative white americans who simply have below average iq. interesting these are the very americans who are most likely to be your foot soldiers in revolutions and wars, defenders of our race.
2. scientific approach failed in america in 1920s. Creationism was a backlash against social darwinism (eugenics) because the ladder implied a certain segment of white population was not worthy of reproduction.
3. cultural/mythologycal approach in germany worked on the other hand though. interesting most of SA and SS foot soldiers belonged to the lower half of iq curve
@Chuck:
‘Kevin,
You and everyone else on the “alternative right” are going about this the wrong way. You need to start by empirically re-establishing the importance of biological race.’
Prof. Macdonald has done this! He contributed a fore-word recently to the English translation of ‘Raciology’ by Vladimir Avdeyev.
Here is the link on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Raciology-Vladimir-Avdeyev/dp/1257083422
@I: I think the most useful way of approaching a person’s views is to believe what they say about themselves, and only start doubting it when we have at least some reason to do that.
I started out as a liberal philosemitic Israel-critic. Later I moved on to become a more and more conservative Israel-defender. Then I started to move in a more racially motivated direction, but I still retained some feeling of brotherhood to the Jews who I considered close racial cousins. (Which, by the way, they are.) I later became skeptical of the value of Israel for the West, and critical of the role Jews have played in history and are playing in the present culture and politics.
So it is not at all impossible for me to believe that someone could be a leftist multiculturalist and a critic of Israel, like Walt. Because, for one, I was one like that. And also because, from this point of view, Israel is part of the West, and the West should not be ethnonationalist. And since Israel is ethnonationalist, he’s criticizing Israel. That’s all.
The same thing goes for Breivik: he’s views are probably just as confused as his writings and actions imply. He’s worried about the declining proportion of blue-eyed people, but he’s also a friend of Israel, and he also believes that there’s nothing wrong with the rest of the immigrants. His assumptions regarding the rest of immigrants might be either that the rest of the immigrants are mostly Eastern Europeans who he considers Nordic as well, or that there’s not much non-Nordic immigration anyway. It might also happen that he wants to send back the Muslim immigrants, but accept the already present non-Muslim immigrants while desiring to stop non-Muslim immigration either. Or maybe he just hasn’t thought it out thoroughly enough. Or he did, but his brain short-circuited at some point.
Most people’s, and especially most liberal professors’ views are confused and often self-contradictory, why can’t a visibly disturbed individual (like Breivik) or a liberal professor (like Walt) have confused and contradictory views about something like immigration or the Jews or anything else?
In which case criticizing him on this site does a lot of good for him. But I somehow doubt this guy could ever be a Euro racial nationalist. Not in this life.
“Clearly it is in the ethnic interests of Europeans to prevent their biological displacement.”
“Displacement,’ as in genocide?
If we are displaced, what corner are moved to? Where do we survive?
In the minds of anti-racists we are less than snail darters.
Name a Black or Asian country that is expected to have open borders. You can not. Only White countries are targeted.
In truth, Whites are to be exterminated. That is Genocide and it is a Crime Against Humanity.
Anti-racists are anti-Whites. They must be confronted on that point.
“The Arab Spring is rapidly devolving into an Islamic nightmare.”
Of course it is.
Sunny Jewish propaganda movements always morph into a nightmare; and when they do, it shows they are working as intended. When the nightmare comes, it finally gives Jews the persecution and suffering they require to affirm the fantasy of being superior, having tried unsuccessfully to be the light unto the once-again-proven inferior nations.
It’s a gambit, part of the larger cycle that they themselves perpetuate, to keep running their sustaining ethno-psychodrama of “bringing their goodness to others; suffering for their goodness at the hands of the Goyim; surviving yet another day by way of the redemption of the God who chose them over all those nasty people who persecute them.”
And we will all pay for it dearly.
Race and culture are indivisible. The latter arises from the former and cannot survive if its foundation is destroyed.
The problem faced by the un-brainwashed citizens of all “white” counties is fear of telling the truth. Why? because those who control the media will brand people, such as MacDonald or for that matter Zundel, as “haters”, “deniers”, or “raciasts”, and attempt to destroy their personal lives and professional lives. Kevin MacDonald is a brave man, he is targeted but not yet destroyed. While Zundel has been publicly destroyed, his insistence on shining the light on blatant lies about WWII have in fact made it possible for people like MacDonald to have come as far as he has.
When it comes to Breivik, the lone gunman piece doesn’t hold water. There is more going on there than meets the eye. If he is part of a movement, it is more likely a movement to discredit nationalists.
That brings me to the first politician destroyed by telling the truth – Enoch Powell. Here is part of his “Rivers of Blood” speech from the late 50′s. There is not an un-brainwashed white in Great Britain that will not say his predictions have come true, and, in fact, many who are not completely brainwashed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cn7dDF74yE&feature=related
The anti-racist liars promote race mixing = genocide.
The anti-racist liars promote mass immigration = death of the environment.
The anti-racist liars deny nature – species compete for space in both the plant and animal kingdoms. Foreign species often are more successful than native species because there are no natural predators. The famines caused by overpopulation are being sold as political problems.
The foreign species in the “west” are the Jews. They have destroyed the natural environment.
@Anon2: When Professor MacDonald correctly warns his fellow ‘whites’ about the ‘historical grudges’ that many non-Europeans harbor towards them – he is not specifically admitting or even claiming that EVERY white man and woman has personally committed some grievous offense against any or all of these angry non-whites. What he is warning us about is that today’s non-whites will most certainly seek to enact revenge upon whites who are living today and in the future for the real or fancied sins of our white ancestors.
Plus, ANON2 is right on the money with this observation:
“What we are facing is pure racial hatred and jealousy–because they covet our territory, because they see us as rivals for resources and jobs, because they want our pretty toys. ” And, also our pretty women, might I add.
Believe this, my fellow white racial realist brothers and sisters. I’ve corresponded with non-whites who have snagged themselves a white female – and they are not the least bit bashful about boasting about their conquest and theft of the genetic future of our race. These non-whites are exactly as ANON2 describes them.
Professor, “eschewing racialist rhetoric in favour of cultural arguments” makes good sense. The fact that immigrants don’t assimilate, don’t adopt our liberal values and never will, (they are unique to the White race) is well-worth highlighting, politically.
I used to think that non-Whites ARE similar to us–it’s just the environment–but now I’ve got tons of data I’ve accumulated that proves otherwise. Fact is, if we become the minority, then we are DEAD! And seeing how the Jews will no doubt still control the media, we won’t even know we have been genocided. A silent revolution topped off with a silent genocide!
@Doug: :”Race and culture are indivisible”. Someone needs to explain this simple reality to the fellow on Youtube who calls himself RamZpaul.
I was listening to his second interview on the Stark Truth podcast on the Voice of Reason Network – having had a previously fairly positive opinion of him on his initial appearance. In the second interview, RamZpaul seemed to come across as some sort of really poorly informed and bizarrely confused half-wit and seemed to be clueless over the fact that race is merely culture gone to seed.
Granted, its not always necessary to feel an intense dislike for other competing ethnic groups, for one to be able to realize that they pose a existential threat to your ethnic group’s survival and legitimate ethnic specific interests – whenever you and they are forced by the anti-white ruling elites to occupy the same geographic territory, but this idea that RamZpaul and even Anders Breivik seem to have that culture and race are somehow unrelated and one can be preserved without concern for the other – this is sheer insanity.
It is also unnatural and clearly violates the laws of nature. Two competing species cannot occupy the same geographic territory without conflicts occurring, and sooner or later, one
or the other must be eliminated – in order to eliminate the competitive threat.
Oh, and RamZPaul sees nothing wrong with miscegenation, despite the cardinal rule that one cannot serve two masters and mixed race couples will almost 100 percent of the time side with the non-white race of the two. In addition, miscegenation is playing right into the hands of the jews who seek the end of the White European race and who cheer for every white baby that does not get born.
‘Moreover, just because Western culture is not fixed and is open to outside influences does not mean that factors internal to Western civilization are not critical.’
This may be getting at the rub.
A great many right wing intellectuals have pointed out that Western Culture is not fixed, and has in addition been on the wrong path… for centuries!
Martin Heidegger, sympathizer to National Socialism, felt we made a wrong turn around Platos time! Friedrich Nietzsche felt that the conversion of Whites to Christianity was a grave error.
Both Italian Fascism and German National Socialism have been viewed by sociologists as palingenetic movements ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palingenetic_ultranationalism ) whose end goal was to return their respective Nations back to a time before modern ‘errors’ had been made. The Italian Fascists longed for a ‘New Roman Empire’ and German National Socialist longed for a return to ‘Ancient Nordicity of brave Viking warriors’. They were totally at odds with the direction that ‘unfixed’ Western Culture was beginning to permutate. (liberal degeneracy of every stripe)
@Luke (re: “grudges”):
The language of “grudge” (MacDonald) and “revenge” (your post) usually implies (or, if you will, presupposes) some prior wrong. Unless you are willing to concede a prior wrong committed by white people, I am suggesting that people interested in defending the diverse white Americans should avoid this language. I think it may be more accurate to use such terms as “historical hatreds,” “ill-will,” or jealousies.
Racists tribes that bear ill will toward the diverse white Americans are, as you seem to agree, usually motivated by other than a prior wrong. Although prior wrongs probably must be invented to “justify” the replacement of the diverse white people of the United States and Europe by alien invaders. Otherwise, what is happening would be genocide.
I don’t mean to imply that the perceptions of non-Whites are accurate–only that they are perceptions. Jews are a great example. Their narrative of anti-Semitism makes them completely blameless victims–not exactly a fair and balanced account.
@Luke:
The odd belief that culture can be separated from race appears in the most unexpected places. I read an interview with Arthur Jensen of IQ fame many years ago (I apologize for being unable to link) in which he said that he didn’t care if it was Chinese who carried on Western culture as long as someone did.
Possibly the lack of feeling for one’s race among many bright academics is partially a result of their over-intellectualized approach to life, and their
feeling obliged to place their intellects in revolt against their animal natures?
It’s a mystery to me really.
From Alternative Right, I just discovered National Conservatism, an English critter that has its head screwed on right. Lots of great stuff.
http://nationalconservatism.blog
well that did not work. Try http://nationalconservatism.blogspot.com
Too much talk and not enough action. Just like obama. We need to get a plan for getting our understanding of the problem to our neighbors. Anything that says ‘white’ will turn them right off from their brainwashing. Say ‘American’ and show how it was in the early sixties, before we were hijacked. They’ll understand.
@ Professor MacDonald (re: grudges versus hatreds)
Thank you for your reply. I do not mean to suggest that you believe past wrongs exist, or that they exist to an extent that they would justify the insidious, deadly campaign being waged against Americans and Europeans. The problem is that the language employed (“grudge” and “revenge”) is commonly interpreted as an implication by the speaker that past wrongs do in fact exist. This is the enemy’s rhetoric. In our mouths, it is a vestige of the very deep brainwashing we have been trying to purge ourselves of.
One of the few things we have a say in is the language we use. We should be careful that enemy rhetoric, as oppressive as it is, doesn’t inadvertently slip into our descriptions of the world. It’s a small quibble here, but through repetition and over time language can make a difference in how people see the world.
Jews are indeed a good example. How common is it to hear German attitudes toward Jews described as deriving from “historical grudges” or “revenge”? Similarly, is Palestinian opposition to the Zionist invasion portrayed in our mainstream press as a “historical grudge” or “revenge”"
My impression is that, to the contrary, Germans and Palestinians were/are presented as acting out of hatred, spite, ill-will, jealousy, barbarism, a cult of death. In short, anti-Semitism.
How do we know that Stephen Walt isn’t a Jew? “Walt” is a pretty common Jewish surname in the United States.
Stephen Walt’s wife is Jewish. So even if Stephen Walt himself isn’t a Jew, he’s married into the tribe.
@bravetruth:
The most pressing problem right now, for all assimilated Americans, is mass immigration. There are reasons to oppose the invasion of our country that do not involve a racialist outlook. We need to get out there and start talking to our fellow Americans and making those arguments.
@I:
If the choice really comes down to either focusing on race or focusing on Jews but not both, it seems the sensible thing to do is focus on the latter. Get to the root of the problem.
An idea (which possibly you’re implying): Just as the opposition to muslim incursion is being framed as a cultural issue, so also could an opposition to Jewish influence be framed as just a cultural issue. Nothing racial about it, it’s just that Jewish culture doesn’t assimilate into Western culture, because Jewish culture upholds the interests of Israel over the interests of the U.S. and other Western countries, supports influx of third world peoples into Western lands as a way of diverting attention away from Jews, etc. etc.
At least with the larger mass of whites, it’s doubtful that such an approach would be regarded as other than disingenuous because of the psychic burden of the Hitler period and its explicitly racial posture toward the Jews, and because of the Jewish threat being much more intellectually difficult to illuminate (this is our huge problem with the larger mass of whites of course) than the muslim threat.
Also, I’m much persuaded by a beautiful pair of posts on another thread, first by Matt Parrott…
But this isn’t really about the Muslim invaders. It’s not really about the Mexican invaders. It’s not really about the Black youth mobs. What it’s really about is a lack of a will of a people to live.
Removing Islamic immigration from Europe is akin to hiding the gun from a man who’s suicidal. It may buy some time, but if a guy’s really set on killing himself, he’ll figure out some other way to do it.
…and then by trainspotter in reply:
…if one rejects race as important, then one is inherently on liberal ground. Liberalism begins to make sense, for if one accepts liberal premises (race doesn’t matter) then liberal conclusions will inevitably follow.
A great post that sums it all up.
Okay, the two examples I gave for Jewish “culture” in my post awaiting moderation just above may be more derived from culture than directly cultural, but those of you who know Jewish culture better can easily supply deeper examples.
@bravetruth:
Anything that says ‘white’ will turn them right off from their brainwashing. Say ‘American’ and show how it was in the early sixties, before we were hijacked. They’ll understand.
That may be best in some situations, but in others not. American Third Position in its radio ad (which the radio station has so far rejected) for its candidate for governor of West Virginia, Harry Bertram, states:
“Vote Harry Bertram for Governor because we must secure a future for White America and our children.”
http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2011/08/west_virginia_r.php
I think that’s the best wording if they can get the station to accept it.
@Z.O.G.: That’s correct. And he has two kids with her, so his children are biologically Jewish.
@Anon2:
I think you’ve convinced me that “historical hatreds,” “ill-will,” or “jealousies” may generally be better words tactically than “grudge” or “revenge.”
But I think any of the words are accurate, since I suspect that insult and injury between groups in history generally flow in both directions, and certainly seem to have between Jews and Europeans. (My views may be influenced at the moment by my currently reading “A Distant Mirror,” an account of Europe’s 14th century written by the, sigh, Jewish-of-course author Barbara Tuchman. I don’t think I’m going to get much of what-the-Jews-did-to-the-Europeans in that book, but there sure is some of the other).
@Chuck:
What are you talking about? Obviously you have not followed most of Prof. MacDonald’s work.
@Harumphty_Dumpty:
…and then by trainspotter in reply:
…if one rejects race as important, then one is inherently on liberal ground. Liberalism begins to make sense, for if one accepts liberal premises (race doesn’t matter) then liberal conclusions will inevitably follow.
But rejecting race as important, or remaining agnostic on it, does not invariably lead to an embrace of mass immigration. It does not preclude a strong nationalism rooted in geography. (Arguably, it might even strengthen such a position.) It does not imply opposition to the rights of local communities to rule themselves.
“Anything that says ‘white’ will turn them right off from their brainwashing. Say ‘American’ ”
I have no problem with that. After all, what is an “American”?
Crevecouer, Letters from an American Farmer: “What then is the American, this new man? He is either an European or the descendant of an European . . . they are a mixture of English, Scottish, Irish, French, Dutch, Germans and Swedes. From this promiscuous breed, that race now called Americans have arisen. . . . The Americans were once scattered all over Europe; here they are incorporated into one of the finest systems of population which has ever appeared.”
This idea of being less-than-ingenuous in discussing a problem, of making token commitments to this or that faction to avoid troublesome resistance, strikes me as a dubious method for advancing a cause. This whole notion of strategizing everything is, for me, unsettling, and rouses distrust of those who practice it. Despite the fact that this habit is common in military and sports, it is nevertheless a form of trickery, and in intellectual matters denotes dishonesty and usage. “Strategy” is one of the most tiresome cliches of Jewish life, and for this and other reasons has become ludicrous – or worse, repugnant.
Further, I would say, that the “intellectual” society under consideration in this article represents an aberration of human behavior. It must be seen as an anemic, disordered element of life. These fleurs de mal springing-up in the hothouses of university life are reflective of nothing more than excessive exercise of the mind, responsible for most of the tragedies of history. In many ways the larger brain-pan of homo-sapiens is a development boding more ill than good. It is the robust, spontaneous, sanguinary man who will deliver us.
Occidental Observer is my preferred site on the Web. Dr. MacDonald lends weight to this movement, and his work is both penetrating and persuasive. However, it gives me pause when I read casual words of resignation like, “If we are indeed witnessing the demise of the West, as there is every reason to believe…” Once in a video-interview discussing the Zionist program, the Prof. commented, “….if they are successful…and they probably will be.” This frame of mind suggests overmuch credulity in the propaganda-tidal-wave forever inundating us. We forget, most polls are conducted by the Jewish Machine, often using unknown demographics; the results are tallied by the same group, and published by them. Mindful of the Kol Nidre Oath, we have no reason to believe anything in which Jews have a part. Other examples are census reports, international credit ratings, etc.
Tangential to this, despair is a good indicator that the cosmic power of the mind is being overlooked. Our thoughts create reality, whether we are aware of this principle or not, whether we consciously utilize this power or not. We must be on guard to keep our expectations upbeat, which is a way of demanding the desired outcome rather than the reverse. Deepak Chopra has remarked, “Mankind has the power to solve his problems. When he is ready to do so, he shall.” This is an allusion to the boundless puissance of collective thinking. The authority of this resource is unimaginable, and if harnessed, can overcome any of the dilemmas entertained at this website.
Considering concrete measures that might be adopted to counter the ceaseless machinations of Zionists, I think COMEDY and SATIRE suggest a terrific possibilities. A Broadway play, for instance, produced by the same Texas billionaires who had such uproarious success with “The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas” would go a long way toward grabbing public attention. Such a piece, spoofing the Jehovah Hoax, with its endless train of depraved Rabbis milking the Jewish people for a do-nothing life of “study” and the manufacture of more than 500 mitzvoth.
@Whites Unite: This is a GREAT idea. What a smart man are you.
Continue to post this idea throughout the site. There will be many who will not see it here.
“Greg
August 6, 2011 – 6:16 pm | Permalink
@Chuck:
What are you talking about? Obviously you have not followed most of Prof. MacDonald’s work. ”
Greg and others,
The case for congenital behavioral differences between populations is extremely weak. If you are interested, I have reviewed the evidence for personality and intelligence differences over at “occidentalist” in various posts — in a somewhat perfunctory manner. While I am partisan to the idea that there are such differences, the empirical data does not strongly support this position. It is not at all convincing and yet convince is what you must do. My suggestion to Kevin was that, instead of complaining that few agree with his position, he should try to do original research to provide empirical support for this view — or at least encourage others to do so. Between national and international adoption studies and numerous longitudinal studies he and others should be able to make a case, if indeed the data supports it. I myself have looked through scores of studies on IQ differences — since that is the most studied behavioral trait in psychology — and found only equivocal support for various racial genetic hypotheses. Ditto studies on personality. If I’m not able to convince myself that “anti-racists” and genetic identicalists are wrong, how could I convince others? If I’m unable to do this how could I make a case that “A rational person should behave as though biological tendencies are critical for the construction of European culture(s) and therefore act to prevent large-scale immigration that could tip the demographic balance against Europeans”?
Again, if you want to make a social-political case that race is practically important, you have to make a empirical case that it is.
Iminent, Immanent, Imanent
It’s next to impossible to get through a post without a couple of bloopers.
Should be “…suggest terrific possibilities.”
Should be “…Such a piece might spoof the Jehovah Hoax…
@Hasbara Matata:
Yep, the messiah complex at work.
We need to remind Jews more often of their messiah complex—it even shows in the way many of them walk. As if they were ready to walk on water. LOL.
@Z.O.G.:
Whenever Moslems have gotten to a certain number in Europe in the past, a war comes and pushes them to the fringes of Europe.
@ Dr. MacDonald: I liked the old commenting system better. The comments were easier to follow and more coherent.
@Chuck: @Chuck:
“The case for congenital behavioral differences between populations is extremely weak. If you are interested, I have reviewed the evidence for personality and intelligence differences over at “occidentalist” in various posts — in a somewhat perfunctory manner.”
I’d like to look at those posts if you can give a link.
A people’s identity is both racial and cultural,but the racial part is more fundamental,because when that is lost it cannot be regained.Culture is learned,if it is lost it can eventually be relearned.A people that cares for its survival should therefore primarily care for the continuance of its racial identity and this entails:1) closing its borders to racial aliens, 2) removing racial aliens already within its borders.There should be no compromise when survival is at stake.People who advocate mass-immigration of racial aliens advocate in fact genocide.To condemn a people’s resistance to its own genocide “on moral grounds” is as absurd as condemning an individual’s resistance to its own murder “on moral grounds”.Any debate on this issue should be cut short with the simple statement: “We don’t accept our genocide”.Period.
@stick: Hi stick,
Reality turns on a dime. There will be a moment of critical mass, and some of us will be ready for it.
@Harumphty_Dumpty:
Just do a google search for “occidentalist” and “race, genes, and disparity.” I focused mostly — though not exclusively — on the African-IQ issue since the majority of racial research deals with that. That logic is that if genetic differences in IQ are established — even minor ones –the concept of race and racial science would be (at least partially) vindicated; theories of other behavior differences, then, would gain plausibility and quite a few anti-racist claims would be undermined.
Unfortunately, the evidence is equivocal at best and tends to support environmentalism — though I try to make the best case to the contrary. My larger point is that if people on the Altright — Kevin included — are going to argue that race makes a practical difference — that different populations are not functional interchangeable — then they need to spend time trying to establish this — or convincing other academics to do so. Otherwise, they need to drop the issue and retool their arguments.
@Chuck: I know truth is sometimes stranger than fiction, but given the high (within population) heritability of IQ plus the simple fact that some of these populations have been evolving independent of each other for several tens of millenia (maybe 30-60 thousand years or in the case of the San possibly even more), it would be strange indeed if there was no significant difference, if only because of drift.
I am not an expert of the question, but I had my first doubts about an environmentalist explanation (which I generally held after reading Jared Diamond) after reading Nicholas Wade (Before The Dawn, 2006, Penguin), who is of course only a popular science author. To me it strengthened the case that it was politically incorrect, and yet a NYT author would still argue for at least some inherited IQ differences between different populations. (I remember that he advocated the idea of Jewish higher IQ. He also stated that if a Martian taxonomist would use our system, he would possibly classify the human race as consisting of more than just one species, but at the very least as consisting of several subspecies. Before that I held the view – which is I think mainstream – that differences among human races are smaller than if they were subspecies.)
However, I obviously haven’t reviewed most of the literature (not a surprise, being a layperson), the only environmentalist view I read was Stephen Jay Gould who has since turned out to be a fraud. (Plus a number of popular science, e.g. Steven Pinker who also seemed to advocate that the black-white IQ difference will tend to disappear over time. He’s apparently more ambivalent regarding Jewish IQ.)
BTW much of your writing seems to be supporting the hereditary case, albeit sometimes admittedly weakly. I guess the reader must keep in mind your own bias. If you say the evidence at hand is somewhat equivocal, then definitely more research needs to be done.
“I think you’ve convinced me that “historical hatreds,” “ill-will,” or “jealousies” may generally be better words tactically than “grudge” or “revenge.””
I like “bad-feelings” the best. That’s the softest way to say it. But it implies the same as a hyper-negative word like “hostile”.
Walt seems to believe that jews have gained so much power in the USA only so they can support Israel. Israel is a smokescreen that the jew banker/media mob is using to cover their real crime. On Walt’s site you can pretty much trash Israel till the cows come home but if you even mention jew central bank control being behind the USA’s extravagent treatment of Israel your comment will never appear. Walt is an associate of the jew banker/media syndicates for sure.
Jews only care about control of the money creation schemes of nations. Everything they do is a concerted effort to keep control of the central banks they already have and to gain control of any they do not. These jew dominated central banks explain ALL jew success. Loaning currency created from nothing to each other is how jews gained control of our nations. IQ or education has nothing to do with it. Anyone who tries to frame jews with the Israel issue is stupid or controlled opposition.
Jew control of our banks is the reason they have thrown open the borders to every white nation. The central banks are really just pyramid schemes and without new players pryamid schemes die. Hence the unbridled immigration of people whose cultures involve having lots of babies. It seems whites abilities to build the most productive nations is contributing to our downfall. The white nations are the jews best cash cows and they are too stupid not to milk us to death.
The problem we face from wealthy whites is that they fear change to our economic system because they are on top. Rich people would rather bring in immigrants to keep the status quo than risk not being rich anymore.
The only answer in my opinion is to try to spread the word that jews success comes from nepotism with our money supply and the control free money buys. Tell people about the fact that jews dominate the boards of directors of most of the corporations that keep sendig jobs overseas. Point out that almost every politician has a staff that is at least half jew. Never stop proving to people that jews control the media. Always mention that politicians need money and media to get elected. Talk about how history proves that when a government is corrupt one only has to look to the treasury to find the corruptors. Then mention the fact that of the 17 executive positions in the US Treasury Dept the 12 most important positions are held by jews. Tell them that there are 50,000 groups of jews that regulary openly meet to discuss furthering jew causes in the USA and that they list this in their mission statements when they try to call you a “conspiricy nut”. Tell blacks and latinos that together they make up 35% of the population but only control 1% of the wealth. Point out that jews are 2% of the population and control almost 40% of the wealth. Let them know that every other group in the USA has wealth that pretty much matches their population. Only blacks and latinos have been left so far behind and only jews who control the central banks have 20 times their share.
In a nutshell lets get the jews out of our banks and media and then deal with the ethnic problems they have caused.
Framing it as a white issue seems doomed to failure as long as the jews control the media.
Lastly the web is a great way for someone to learn AFTER someone like US has told them in person to their face. It is almost impossible to reach someone who is unaware without being brave enough to say it out in the open. Writing on a website hiding behind a fake name will not embolden any politician to take a stand.
It is time to speak out in public with a loud voices and our heads held high. It will end up costing you economicly and personally but if you care about your kids future pay the piper now so they won’t have to later. Because the cost to them will dwarf any discomfort you might feel from getting into the trenches today.
All you cowards using some symbolic name that you think has meaning stop. If you are to scared to use your real name at least use one that seems real. Some stupid name from greek mythology or some other inane tripe screams cowardice and cowards do not deserve to get their country back.
If you are not talking about this issue with everyone you meet you are just pissing in the wind.
If your reply is going to be you will lose your job or anything like that just re-read the part about cowards not deserving their country back. It was for you. If you think your fake name has some kind of esoteric meaning that is important re-read the part about cowards not deserviing their country back. It was also for you.
Anyone who replys to this post without their real name is not only a coward but stupid as well.
Why are people dancing around the real issue of historical grudges against whites? These have been fanned by the chosenites, and they have been successful because of the myth of Hitler’s 6 million victims which was “done” by nasty whites while other whites stood by and did nothing, which makes them nasty too. This is the key. Expose this myth for what it is – a fairy tale. Once that happens white guilt will stop and people will begin to understand how they have been led down the garden path.
In my previous post, I referred to Enoch Powell. He was quite clear: that mass immigration was going to have unintended consequences, because of the cultural differences; that while he was aware that there was differences between races, he did not subscribe to the theory that one race was inherently better than another; and that it was madness to heap, through continuing mass immigration, more fuel onto the nation’s funeral pyre. I had the good fortune to have been in Britain 40 years ago, to see the last vestiges of the Britain that was. Although a Canadian, who had ancestors emigrate from Britain throughout the 19th century, and was aware of the different cultures in Britain, it was still a culture shock. Many Americans that I met at the time, also had a culture shock. Many North Americans had/have the link of the language, but by and large it didn’t go a whole lot further.
In Denmark 40 years ago, there were signs in public toilet cubicles showing a figure seated properly on a toilet seat, and another showing a figure squatting on a toilet seat. The former had a green circle around it, the latter a red circle with a red line through it. I thought it was a joke. When I asked about it I was told that the Moroccans/Algerians (every non white who was not a Negro was referred to as a Moroccan or Algerian) squatted on the seats and ended up missing the target, which made it unusable for Danes. Clearly an unintended circumstance of immigration.
I continue to believe that the incident in Norway was meant to discredit “white nationalism”. It is not possible for the carnage to have been done by one “nut”.
I meant to add that I understand why Kevin MacDonald is reluctant to take on the myth. He has already pushed the envelope, and taking on the myth would be suicidal – both academically and politically.
It really isn’t that difficult. Certain cultures and ethno-religious-ideologies are more complimentary and compatible with and the West than others.
Simply throw out the Zionists, Islamists and any other factions that refuse to assimilate and inevitably descend into ethno-fascism.
At this point, both Zionist and Islamist hostility, subversion and anti-Western, treasonous intent has been well established and documented; there’s no reason whatsoever that Western peoples need put up with that kind of treachury, just as there’s no reason they should put up with neocon and liberal fascist treachury.
Steps have been taken to target Islamists, but where are the steps being taken to target Zionists, neocons, and liberal fascists?
I guess those who have been bought off or sold their souls to the Judeofascists simply aren’t interested in taking the steps necessary to preserve Western civilization — which makes them part of the problem.
Stephen Walt said:
“Christianity itself is an import to Europe — it was invented by dissident Jews in Roman Palestine and eventually spread to the rest of Europe and beyond. I’ll bet there were Norse pagans who were just as upset when the Christians showed up as Breivik is today.”
And gunpowder was invented by the Chinese.
Synthesis of outside ideas has always been a part of European tradition, but importing ideas is not the same as importing people. The Christians who showed up in Scandinavia 1000 years ago CONVERTED the Norse pagans, they didn’t repopulate the countryside with their own kind.
Europe (and it’s precursor) made Christianity what it would become. Try to imagine how Christianity would appear today had there been no Emperor Constantine or Karl the Great.
Walt has written a very unpopular book and will spend the rest of his career taking opportunities like this to salvage his reputation among fellow liberal academics.
Notice how he tries to exonerate his work in a roundabout way at the end of the article. (Terrorist Osama Bin Laden was not influenced by “The Israel Lobby”. ) As I recall, the opening sections of his book read the same way – apologizing before he and his co-author had even done anything to apologize about…making sure nobody would mistake them for Nazis or David Duke.
@Chris Moore:
At this point, both Zionist and Islamist hostility, subversion and anti-Western, treasonous intent has been well established and documented;
I have to disagree. I don’t believe it has been established or documented that there is Muslim hostility, subversion and anti-Western, treasonous intent. What’s your evidence? And lest people draw the wrong inference from my statement, I am someone who believes that 9/11 was carried out by the Arab resistance.
@Chuck:
Wow. It should only take me the rest of my natural life to read your impressive blog on race, IQ, etc. Thanks.
http://occidentalascent.wordpress.com/author/lesacreduprintemps19/page/2/
http://occidentalascent.wordpress.com/
I think Islamists who want sharia law in the West are nearly as big a threat as Zionists. I say nearly, because although they have the numbers, Muslims don’t have anywhere near the good will and trust in the West that the Jews enjoy, nor do they have Jewry’s sadistic, Machiavellian, crypto-serial killer instincts. Muslims simply want the world to submit to Allah, whereas Jewry wants to the world to submit to a totalitarian government run by it, but simultaneously desires to sadistically torture and ultimately destroy even many of those Gentiles willing to submit to totalitarianism (e.g. “secular” Bolshevik Jewry’s behavior in early Soviet Russia).
Jewish religious doctrine, it’s self-serving, apocryphal historiography, and its deliberately (internally) engineered persecution complex and resentment complex all ensure ultimately genocidal intent towards gentiles.
When I say “both Zionist and Islamist hostility, subversion and anti-Western, treasonous intent has been well established and documented,” I mean they are available to intellectuals who want to go looking (even if they aren’t well documented or broadcast in mainstream media) and thus true intellectuals (who are responsible for shaping future society) have no excuse not to follow the evidence trail and start drawing the necessary implications for future policy.
I don’t think Muslims instigated 9/11; I think some Muslim participants were probably useful idiots in an inside job carried out by Zionists, but at any rate, both Zionist and Islamist malign intent was evidenced in the operation, whether the Islamist participants knew they were working for the Zionists or not.
It’s comparable to the operation to lie the U.S. into the Iraq war. Did the Bushcons know they were ultimately working for the Zionists? Does it matter? In the end, what really matters is that the malign intent was present in the hearts and minds of all of the parties, which means none of them can be trusted.
Commenters who use every post to rant about 9/11 conspiracy theories are a pain.
@Chris Moore:
Are you saying that you don’t believe the United States, through its own actions, had given Arabs reason to hit back?
Please address Exhibits A (our complicity in the ongoing Zionist invasion of Palestine), B (our imposition of corrupt and oppressive rulers on local Arab populations), and C (our invasion of Iraq and subsequent murderous sanctions against the Iraqi people).
Wilt
The IQist haven’t got a clue. They seek approval from academic scientists that their demographic preference is respectable. I mean what nonesense. What we should be doing is stating unapologetically our racial preference for America. That’s it..nothing else has to be said. And in a debate with a race-replacement enthusiast, say:Why should Native Born White Americans be in favor of being race-replaced at the hands of high fertility post-1965 nonwhites? This is a question that obvioulsy answers itself. Then state that race-replacement enthusiasts should not be the least bit shocked that Native Born White Americans are rebelling against the policy of race-replacement.
@Someday:
A pain for whom?Yes,for Jews who fear that the exposure of 9/11 as a Jew job will spell the end of their rule in America and the world.Deflecting attention away from 9/11 is part of your assignement ,no?The other part is to coopt WN for the sake of Zionism,just like your co-ethnics have done with all new nationalist parties in Europe.So let’s point at 9/11 as a Jew job.Go to theinformationunderground.com (“Israel did 9/11″),or visit Christopher Bollyn’s website (“9/11 solved”) or watch the video “Missing Links”.That will open your eyes.No amount of ridicule of the “Somedays” of this world can stop you.
‘white’ america is the problem. Skinheads, White Supremecy, White Rights. We are ‘Americans’ and they’re not.
@Whites Unite:
After all, what is an “American”?
We all know what an American ‘was’. Henry Ford, Thomas Edison, Lindbergh, Disney, all of us in the fifties, a bunch of wonderful people too ‘nice’ to challenge the trash that came later.
Under the theory that 9/11 was an inside job with Muslim participants as useful idiots in an operation carried out by Jewish Zionists, just as under the theory that the false Iraq war intelligence was an inside job by Jewish Zionist neocons and Judeo Christian Zionist Bushcons, in both cases, their respective ideologies (Islamism on one hand and Zionism/neoconservatism on the other) both produce dangerous, deluded psychopaths and murderous fanatics fully capable of treason against their respective nations (not unlike Judeo Christian Zionist Anders Breivik).
Indeed, in both cases, an absolutist reading of their respective religions (Islamists believing Allah is supreme, Zionists believing Jews are God’s supreme “chosen”) is the underlying motive. (Another example is treasonous, U.S. government insider, anthrax terrorist Bruce “by blood and faith, Jews are God’s chosen, and have no need for ‘dialogue’ with any gentile” Ivins.)
And of course, in all cases there is an opportunistic money angle wherein encouraging or arranging these kinds of operations is financially convenient to the bigwigs pulling the strings, who themselves never seem to be the ones putting their lives on the line or pulling the trigger.
This behind-the-scenes plotting, scheming and murderous string-pulling is a very elitist Jewry characteristic. Think, for example of the Pharisees instigating the crucifixion of Jesus by the Romans without wanting to dirty their own hands with the deed.
The same kind of crap has been going on by Jewish elites and their lowlife collaborators for the last 2,000+ years, and probably by opportunistic Islamists since the days of Mohammad.
“Christian” charlatans also have a long and ignoble track record. But there’s no question that the Judeo Christian Zionists are further out of step and at odds with Christian doctrine than are the Jewish Zionists and Islamists with their respective religions.
@Chris Moore:
I’m not sure if you saw my 4:51 pm reply to you, which appears to have been released on delay by the moderators. If you look at it, I would be interested in your response to my question.
@Anon2: Yes, I absolutely agree that all the items on you list and many more have given Muslims justification for their anger, and its no surprise whatsoever that they have resulted in blowback.
But all of the items on your list, at their root, were a consequence of Zionist infiltration and co-opting of the U.S. government. Thus, the most effective means of redressing those wrongs is to systematically go about broadcasting that fact, and for Arab and Muslim elites to put some of their piles and piles of oil money behind the cause of exposing the Zionist takeover both internationally and in the United States.
Why haven’t Arab and Islamic elites done that to a greater extent? It’s because, just like the Judeo Christian Zionists and the Judeophile Marxist and multicultural left elites, they’re corrupt and compromised to the core, and the don’t want to make too many waves for a status quo that maintains their wealth and rewards their corruption, even if that means slowly allowing the Arab and Islamic masses to get picked off.
As I see it, any system’s integrity can be judged by the extent to which it allows itself to be compromised by Jewry and its self-serving, totalitarian agenda, and the extent to which that system fights to preserve or regain its integrity.
Corrupt, totalitarian-minded systems that serve fewer and fewer elites deserve their torment, including Islam, because at their core, they are like-minded with Jewry and its bad will towards mankind and hence, eventually even their own kind.
I always harken back to the Jewish Bolshevik influence (backed by Western Jewish bankers) on the early Soviet Union because it is so resonant, but it’s no accident that Mubarak’s Egypt, for example, strongly resembled the Soviet Union in its statist authoritarianism.
It’s self-evident that Islam, like Judaism, is conducive to pseudo-religious, Godless authoritarianism.
@Chris Moore:
The examples you give are of perfidious Arab elites who collude with Zionism and U.S. imperialism against the interests of the Arab people. These are not Islamists; they are quislings, traitors, tyrants, puppets of the United States and Israel. This is not evidence of Muslim ill-will toward the United States and Europe.
True Muslims have been some of the most persecuted people under Mubarak and other regimes. Interestingly, it was common to hear Arabs refer to Mubarak as a “Jew” (meaning a Zionist). No one considers these corrupt elites as Islamists. The Muslim Brotherhood was marginalized or kicked out of Egypt. Bin Laden campaigned against the corruption and perfidy of the Saudi leadership.
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.
@I:
“If we assume Breivik’s statements that he is “anti-racist, pro-Israel, and pro-homosexual” are “just for cover”, then why not consider that Walt’s pro-multiculturalism statements might be serving a similar purpose? Does anyone seriously believe that his book The Israel Lobby would be in every bookstore in the country if he were an open racialist?”
“I” – you’re on the way. This is almost the right sort of insight. But it goes deeper still.
We don’t to ask “what is the true motivation of Walt”. Such questions are unanswerable anyway, and leave us open to being undermined by infiltrators who might then promote multiculturalism under the guise they are doing like Walt – assuming his calculation is in our best interest – but for them the motivation being to weaken, confuse, and break us down.
In many situations, unless there is a really good way to answer the question, motive is a losers game. I’m actually a black guy trolling you. Actually I’m a Jew more intelligent than you just trying to mess with your mind. Or am I? Can you tell? What if I was 10 times more subtle and devilishly ingenius….would you be able to tell?
We have to understand that if we begin to get some traction, some success, then the forces against us will come out in overdrive. Any form of centralization, any form of strategic planning, any double-speak from guys like Walt that can be identified; will all be identified and we will see our work brought down around us.
It has to be decentralized, it has to be multidimensional, it has to have the characteristic of growing-in-complexity and sophistication. For this to happen then there will have to a blend of positions and movements, some of the multiculturalist, some of them socialist, some of them capitalist, some of them about business networks and free markets. In each domain all of them a spectrum of sub-movements in their own right. A confusing complexity of often contradicting movements and beliefs, yet all of which somehow, in some subtle or not so subtle way….in the balance….are good for us, good for the whites, in their fight against the peril now facing them.
It doesn’t matter what Walt’s motive is. Is it the case in your judgement that by ‘rehabilitating’ himself by becoming multicultural, when all is said and done his actions are good for the whites or bad for teh whites? As you say, it makes his other work more readable to the frightened folk, so that’s a major consideration. It also makes his work harder to attack and undermine using demonization, so that’s another consideration.
But then it’s deeper still. Let’s say Walt’s motives are for our better good. Does that mean sites like TOO and KM should not be attacking him for his multicultural views? No of course not, because KM is in a completely different, and crucial, dimension. His is to keep pulling things straight again, keep preventing the people in their various walks they have chosen, never go ‘native’ with their ideas, keep coming straight, at least in their private minds.
There’s another reason to stop worrying about motives and start developing the sophistication of your sense of how to resolve the question ‘what is good for the whites?’. Quite often the actions of the enemy, although they may think work to their ends, actually can work to our ends, with certain pushes here and pulls there, can become good for us, and bad for them.
It’s a complex game. We will prevail..we are much much more than that which is ranged against us. Their triumphs will become their burdens. Their advantages will become their achilles heel. Their tactics will become their downfall. The giant awakens.
@Mickey Meadows:
And so people might ask, how could this resurgence then happen without central planning, without central strategy? How could our salvation come to be, this ‘multidimensional, multi-level’ unimaginable complexity and sophistication that builds up enough momentum that when the day comes, the strategies of our enemies, once thought so indominatable, are crushed underfoot hardly without noticing. Crushed like the knat on the windshield, like an old wooden table under the wheels of a juggernaught.
The answer is simple. A free market of sorts. The free market out there works because it is united by the profit motive. Ours will work because it will be united by the shared instinct ‘what is good for the whites’.
@Harumphty_Dumpty:
Jensen was born August 24, 1923, to a father of Danish ancestry and a mother who was half Polish Jewish and half German. In other words a full Jew. This may explain his mystifying disregardard for White descendants, of course he may just have been making a tactical statement. When one is studying race and IQ it helps to be jewish, it gives a certain protection to be member of an authorized victim group from the impact of the charge of racism. I’m not sure when Jensen revealed the Jewish component of his ancestry.
Interesting piece partly concerning Brevick
http://natalt.org/2011/08/11/the-neofascist-method-the-edl-breivik-and-double-legality/