Introduction
Jared Taylor is a racial realist. He believes that racial differences are real and not merely a social construct. He has spent decades defending the White race, as distinct from the Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians who share his American citizenship.
But Taylor is not just a generic White man. He is also an Anglo-Saxon Protestant whose English ancestors arrived in America in the seventeenth century. Indeed, having married an Englishwoman, his children, too, are pure-bred WASPs, to use the snide acronym favoured if not invented by American Jews. Curiously, however, Taylor suffers from the pandemic WASP disease that I call Anglo-Saxon Anglophobia. Like most WASPs, he refuses to recognize his own people as a race with its own distinctive bioculture. Indeed, his recent book, White Identity: Racial Consciousness in the 21st Century, contains not a single reference to WASPs. Instead, he reduces America’s founding race to the lowest common denominator of Whiteness allegedly shared with sundry ethno-religious groups as disparate as Germans, Italians, Lebanese, Armenians, and Jews.
The higgledy-piggledy category of Whiteness sits oddly alongside Steve Sailer’s more finely-tuned definition of race as “a large, partly-inbred extended family.” Sailer’s approach is more sensitive to the socially-constructed element of racial identity. Accordingly, it is not just major, continental population groups such as Blacks, Whites, and Asians that count as “races;” even the Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda or Loyalists and Republicans in Northern Ireland fit into Sailer’s concept of race.
Sailer’s definition reminds me—a Canadian, indeed a natural-born British subject—of the two solitudes, once commonly described as “the two founding races” of the Dominion of Canada. The “British race” was the core population of English Canada. Moreover, until recently, tightly knit, wealthy WASP elites sat atop the ethnic and class hierarchies constituting Canada’s vertical mosaic. And, when applied to French Canadians, Sailer’s “partly-inbred” qualifier is a striking understatement. There were no more than sixty thousand colonists in New France at the time of the British conquest in 1759. This relatively small and isolated “founder population” has since produced about seven million descendants. Surely, the remarkably “thick” ethnic identity of the Québeçois nation deserves to be recognized as racial in character.
By comparison, White racial identity is a “thin” statistical abstraction. It masks real racial differences that distinguish (White) Anglo-Saxon Protestants from (White) Irish, Italian and Polish Catholics, (White) Orthodox Greeks, Serbians, and Russians, (White) Lebanese Maronites, (White) Bosnian Muslims, and, last but not least, (White) Jews.
Each of those large, partly-inbred European extended families still constitutes a lump of gristle in the American “melting pot.” By contrast, American WASPs have been “Whited-out;” they became the invisible race. As such, WASPs are the only ethno-racial group that refuses to take its own side in the inter-ethnic squabbles endemic to the American racial spoils system.
Albeit much more slowly than the reign of terror in Jacobin France or bloody Bolshevik purges in Russia, the extraordinarily long-lived and ever-escalating, radicalism of the American Revolution has devoured its own Anglo-Saxon Protestant children.
An Anglo-Saxon Century?
Two and a half centuries ago, the Anglo-Saxon civilization of Greater Britain was firmly established on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean; it was split asunder by the colonial rebellion in America. The American Adam, Homo Americanus, was born in 1776 rejecting his ancestral allegiance to the King of England; he also formally renounced the blood faith of his Anglo-Saxon ancestors, embracing instead the civil religion of the American Republic.
The genetic foundation of the newly-independent White Republic was based not on blood but on the legal and political legitimacy of the Federalist Constitution of 1787. Until the abolition of Black slavery seventy-some years later, the ideal typical Homo Americanus was a White man. Even after Blacks were granted American citizenship by the Fourteenth Amendment, however, the implicitly Anglo-Saxon Protestant character of the Republic was taken for granted.
Following America’s rise to world power at the turn of the twentieth century, the Republic achieved geopolitical equality with the British Empire. Many American and English writers therefore advocated that the governments and peoples of the two English-speaking great powers should work to restore the unity of the Anglo-Saxon race. In 1903 a prominent American corporate lawyer (of Madeiran Portugese ancestry), John Randolph Dos Passos, wrote a book based on the premise that “in a preponderating degree the future of mankind” belongs to the Anglo-Saxon race. Accordingly, he proposed an alliance designed to unite the English-speaking peoples of the USA and the British Empire. To make such a deal attractive to American opinion, he held out the tantalizing prospect of the eventual annexation of Canada to the USA. In return, America would recognize a common citizenship and establish a free trade zone incorporating every Anglo-Saxon country.
John Randolph Dos Passos
Another American author, Sinclair Kennedy, went one step further to advocate an outright political federation, or pan-Anglo-Saxon union, of all seven Anglo-Saxon countries, including Australia, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, and Newfoundland alongside Great Britain and the USA.
Today such grandiose visions seem absurdly out of reach. Awesome Anglo-Saxon roosters have become wimpy WASP feather dusters. Just recently, GOP Presidential candidate Mitt Romney had to rush into damage control mode when one of his advisors had the gall to suggest that the USA and the UK were well placed to cooperate given their common Anglo-Saxon heritage.
Clearly, Anglo-Saxon Protestants are now the race that dares not speak its name. Indeed, American universities have begun to flush the history of Great Britain and the British overseas diaspora down the memory hole. Just recently, Peter Sayles complained of “The Closing-Down of British Studies in the American Mind.” He reports that it is becoming almost impossible for graduate students in British history to find jobs. Before long, it may be impossible to find graduate degree programs in the subject.
However disappointing, it is not surprising, therefore, to find that when Jared Taylor examines “The Crisis We Face” in the concluding chapter of White Identity, he does not address, or even mention, the large, partly-inbred, extended family which should have first claim to his racial loyalties.
Whaddya Mean “We,” White Man?
In order to understand how and why White Anglo-Saxon Protestants have become the invisible race, we must unpack the “We” in the title of the concluding chapter of White Identity.
In Taylor’s usage, the meaning of the term is rather ambiguous. At times, his “we” seems to carry a civic connotation, as when he discusses the Hispanic gang problem exacerbated by “our proximity to Mexico, our porous southern border, and our burgeoning Hispanic population” (emphasis added). In that context, the collective “we” appears to include all American citizens, whatever their colour, creed, or national origin.
Mostly, however, his “we” implicitly denotes those belonging to the White race, as distinct from Blacks, Asians, and Hispanics, whose growth in numbers and influence now threatens to displace the founding people of the Constitutional Republic. Taylor contends that White Americans are a distinct race with a biological character, needs, and interests of its own.
Unfortunately, he argues, most White Americans value individualism and the material comforts of the consumer culture more than racial solidarity. They now face fierce competition from the other, far more ethnocentric, racial groups streaming into their homeland. In these circumstances, the collective survival of White Americans depends upon their capacity to develop a racial consciousness of their own.
Taylor invokes the authority of science and his own considerable powers of rational argument to persuade fellow Whites that race is a fundamental aspect of individual and collective identity—even for White folks who now “cheerfully contemplate their disappearance as a distinct people.”
But is it true that White Americans are a “distinct people”? Do Whites now constitute a race “in itself” which is capable of becoming a race “for itself” anytime in the foreseeable future? To answer that question, we must examine White identity along both the vertical and the horizontal dimension.
The Problem of Class
Along the vertical axis, White identity has always been comparatively shallow. White identity is relational rather than intrinsic or affective; it is, therefore, both flat and negative. Englishmen never thought of themselves as Whites until they encountered the Black races in the course of the African slave trade. When they did so, Whiteness was not about who they were; it drew attention to who they were not.
The more significance colonists in both the Caribbean and the American mainland attached to the blackness of the slaves, the more significant became the whiteness of Protestant Englishmen. According to historian Winthrop Jordan, “from time immemorial Englishmen had been born to a status, to a cultural role: now they were being born to an appearance, to a physical condition as well.”
Caribbean slave-owners were the first to discover the political utility of building a common front against the threat of a slave insurrection by sharing a “White” identity with other poor or landless colonists. According to Matthew Parker:
Planters, who had recently lumped together African slaves and ‘dissolute English, Scotch and [particularly] Irish,’ came to realise the usefulness to their security of ‘whiteness’. A pamphleteer writing at the time felt it necessary to explain to his readers in England that ‘white’ was the general name for Europeans. And just as the 1661 Acts were copied throughout the English West Indies and in South Carolina, so this new ideology of whiteness was spread from Barbados and carried around the empire.
On the North American mainland, in the course of the First (Federal) Republic (1787–1865), all Whites were created equal. Of course, White skin privilege was especially important to the politics and culture of the Southern slave states. Privately, however, more than a few wealthy planters ridiculed the notion that the “mere animal man, because he happens to wear a white skin” should be entitled to full and exclusive privileges of citizenship.”
Once the Confederacy lay in ruins, the Second (Bourgeois) Republic (1865–1933) enshrined the formal legal equality of Blacks in its newly-amended Constitution. At the same time, formal legal equality among Whites was overshadowed by the bitter class struggles which became the hallmark of newly-industrialized American society.
The rise of the big business corporation fatally undermined solidarity among White Americans. Shareholders and managers belong to the White race in body but not in soul. In the Gilded Age, the corporate bourgeoisie were conspicuously indifferent when not actively hostile to the collective needs and interests of working- and middle-class White Americans.
Under the stress of the Depression and World War II, the tide of class struggle shifted somewhat in favour of working class Whites. But, as the post-war era wore on, corporate and political elites of the Third (Managerial) Republic (1933–2008) were drawn increasingly from upwardly-mobile Jews and other ethnic groups more or less hostile to the founding race of the American Republic.
As the WASP ascendancy faded away, the political or the managerial class outside the Deep South offered little or no resistance to the forced integration of working and middle class Whites with Blacks. White flight became the only option for both ordinary WASPs and the hitherto unmeltable ethnics.
The Horizontal Dimension of “Whiteness”
In the golden age of the First Republic, all Whites were equal in the eyes of the law. Nonetheless, Anglo-Saxon Protestants were still politically, culturally, and economically dominant. Only against both slave and free Blacks was the founding race of British colonists united as Whites with other European settler groups, such as Germans, Dutch, Swedes, and latterly, Irish Catholic. Otherwise, significant horizontal cleavages existed within the White population. Since then, ethno-religious divisions among White Americans have multiplied and deepened. Under the broad umbrella of White hegemony, a new ethnic hierarchy was established within which Anglo-Saxon Protestants lost their accustomed place at the top of the heap.
Symptomatic of that cultural revolution, British Studies are being closed down in the American mind while the intellectual and cultural hegemony of Jewish writers and academics is ever-more deeply entrenched both in American universities and in the mainstream media. When I sought (in vain) to interest academic publishers in my manuscript on The WASP Question, I could but envy the lucky authors of the flood of books on Jewish Studies pouring out of virtually every university press.
Taylor worries greatly over the negative impact that Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians have on American culture while devoting separate chapters to the racial consciousness of each of those groups. Nowhere, however, does he discuss the nature of Jewish racial consciousness or the enormously corrosive and degrading impact Jews have had upon the common culture of Anglo-Saxon Protestant America.
Of course, Jews were not the only sub-set of Whites determined to deconstruct the WASP ascendancy. The Irish along with the ethnic alliance that Catholic writer Michael Novak dubbed the PIGS—Poles, Italians, Greeks, and Slovaks—also played supporting roles in “unWASPing” Homo Americanus. Each of these groups (again, to varying degrees) has been able to enjoy the benefits of “Whiteness”—without sharing equally in its burdens.
Taylor also worries about the negative impact of miscegenation—but only the racial mixing of Whites with Blacks, Hispanics, or Asians. He is not concerned that the Anglo-Saxon race is being “denatured” by mixing with other phenotypically White ethnic groups. He is not alone in this unconcern. Greg Johnson of Counter-Currents Publishing is especially blasé. Indeed, he celebrates the “blending” of European ethnicities into “White Americans.”
But, speaking as someone concerned with the decline of the Anglo-Saxon race, the difference between “blending” and “mongrelisation” is not at all clear. Johnson suggests that the only solution to deeply entrenched inter-European racial animosities requires the elimination of inter-European racial differences. There should be little doubt that, by producing a mulatto child, a White/Black couple violates the commandment to honour one’s father and mother. But must that commandment be suspended when, say, a WASP man and a Jewish woman produce hybrid offspring?
I still vividly recall primary school teachers during my childhood in small town Ontario who warned us against the perils of mixed marriages. And they were not talking about White/Black couplings but rather the social divide between (White) Protestants and Catholics. Were they wrong to be concerned? What are the social costs of mixed marriages for the individuals concerned, for the children of such unions, and for the wider community?
Surely, homogenized “White” individuals who straddle and blur established ethno-religious boundaries should be objects of pity rather than models to be emulated. Are not such people detached, spiritually and genetically, from any really existing European race?
Germans, Italians, and Englishmen: all can and should reproduce, each according to its own kind. Blending together different White racial groups in a quest to breed generic Europeans is to create a deracinated population of ethno-hermaphrodites.
The thin, attenuated nature of such a rootless White identity reinforces its essentially negative character. To be White mostly means that one is not Black, Asian, or Hispanic. Small wonder then that, as Taylor observes, many Whites believe that their race has “no valid group interests, so it is illegitimate for them to attempt to organize as Whites.”
Most of the allegedly White writers Taylor cites to establish the widespread currency of such ethno-masochistic views happen to be Jews. Taylor appears not to notice. Taylor treats Jews as fellow Whites even when they stand outside the tent pissing inwards.
One wonders: Why do Jews figure so prominently among those denouncing “white skin privilege”? Perhaps it is because (like Irishmen, Italians, Poles, and Greeks—only more so) Jews have a thick ethnic identity rooted in a powerful sense of affinity with their own kith and kin. Whiteness is a secondary, optional, identity for members of many White immigrant groups.
WASPs alone are discouraged from parading under their own colours. Accordingly, WASPs alone bear the unalloyed shame of the universally reviled White racial identity. Blended White “ethnics” remain free to wallow in the Ellis Island Syndrome as they identify with their immigrant forbears allegedly victimized by snobbish, arrogant WASPs.
Having become the race that everyone, including its own children, loves to hate, Anglo-Saxon Protestants now find themselves in exile from the New World garden of earthly delights (implicitly) deeded to their Patriot ancestors by the revolutionary religion of the Republic.
End of Part 1 of 2. Go to Part 2.
Andrew Fraser was born in Canada and educated there and in the USA before moving to Australia where he taught law at Macquarie University in Sydney. He is the author of The WASP Question: An Essay on the Biocultural Evolution, Present Predicament, and Future Prospects of the Invisible Race (Arktos, 2011)
The Joys of Jihad: Islamentable, Isatrocious, Isbetrayal
Nordics versus Implicit Jews in "The Switch"
Without the Pole Irish Greek Slavs , urban whites, Jewish ascendancy could never have been acheived in America.
We should have put a chain fence on Ellis Island and kept the Oreillys and hannitys from ever arriving.
They killed America, not Jews.
Hardcore.
Sorry, but this article is completely out of touch.
Anglo Saxons destroyed their own identity with their own practices: Capitalism, Imperialism, and egalitarian Christianity.
They have for decades continued to believe that they can live independent lives via capitalist ownership.
That have for decades continued to be too confident in their system believing that it would never fail.
They still do. Look at the Republicans and how stupidly and religiously they believe in free markets and free trade.
THEY WERE THE ONES who invited the Eastern Europeans and Italians because THEY wanted laborers for their factories.
I’m sorry, I’m not a Communist, but like Goebbels, I 100% agree with Karl Marx’s position on capitalism.
The Bolsheviks took Marx seriously because he was 100% seriously as a social thinker: the Anglo Saxon capitalists dig their own graves with their grandiose beliefs and unsustainable practices.
Anglo Saxon identity is disappearing in all the former colonies. It didn’t even last 300 years.
But they still wanna believe they can maintain their independent living and capitalist ownership in country full of immigrant peasants who hate their guts.
Well, capitalism was never a planner for the future, now was it?
You know how they say, “with my brothers, against my cousins; with my cousins, against the world”.
It depends on the situation. The current situation is such that there is no room for inter-White conflict.
Anglos are a valuable niche but not much can be gained by clinging to such a small chunk of the pie. In an era where overall White numbers are dwindling, it seems foolish to focus on an even smaller sect within the greater minority.
Speaking as an Anglo Saxon, I would actually like to see some new realism who and what Europeans are – enter into these sort of discussions. England, and most other European countries, had intense class systems. These were racial systems because what actually happened in Europe is that all these countries were settled or invaded by northern people…people from high up in Nothern Europe…Nordics basically. They became the ruling elites. And that’s pretty much the way it stayed right up until the 20th century. There was interbreeding..there was movement between class layers. So lower classes…basically the descendents of the indigenous people, say Britons, benefited from Nordic genes. But not hugely….not enough to say that they had become Nordics. And likewise the ruling elites – almost exclusively of Nordic stock for example in the case of Britain it was first the Anglo Saxon elites who were then replaced by the Normans and subsequently intermarried – benefited from the very best of the indigenous people, who because of their talent, beauty or bravery made it up through the class levels.
Now look, I’m not higher class so there’s no ulterior motive in play here, but we have to accept that the vast majority of European accomplishments have come out of this elite, that invaded and then controlled European states. The ordinary classes are primarily of the original indigenous folk of the country, with some Nordic mixing-in.
With that said, we have to remember that both the indigenous peoples of European states and the Nordic invaders had a recent common ancester population. They were all part of the white peoples.
But most Britons are genetically almost entirely unchanged for thousands of years. On current evidence their closest relatives are the Basques of Spain.
And none of this should be a problem for any of us. I’m not Nordic. I’m part of the European people but I’m not part of the elite who produced the vast majority of all the things that tend to make us feel like we are special. I’ve got some inheritance in that direction, but not a huge amount. It’s something like 4% on average.
Where were we before we were invaded by Jewish mendacity? We – that is our ruling elites – were thinking about what to do about the unwashed masses. How to improve them genetically, and how to stop them outbreeding the better classes. Our answer to this was Eugenics.
In reality what eugenics really meant was slowly replacing Indigenous genes with Nordic genes.
Was this a bad deal for the indigenous. In a way no, because the best of their genes were being admitted and had been admitted for centuries.
But with all of this said…is there an ‘Anglo saxoN’ race? Am I Anglo Saxon? Yes in the hisorical, emotional, cultural, geographical sense. But in the racial sense? Yes at the current level of ‘race realism’ which as the author has said, is pretty superficial…the author is actually complaining about Jared Taylor’s superficiality.
But in the sense of the best understandings that we could be using at the current time. No. I’m an Indigenous Briton with some Nordic hand-me-downs. The Nordics are the best of us, they’ve ruled over us because they were better..better thinkers, better fighters, better philosophers. They were some sort of speciation event up in the Northern places.
I have a pretty good WASP pedigree. My father’s family first set foot in North American in 1612. As far as I know, all my ancestors who arrived from England and Scotland were Protestant, and their ancestors before them came from England and Scotland going all the way back to the Middle Ages (when some German blood supposedly entered the family) and the Norman Conquest (when some Norman French Viking blood came in), and not long before that, it all fades into the mists of time.
I think it would have been entirely proper for my WASP ancestors to have worked to preserve the racial, ethnic, and religious homogeneity of America. When the US was founded, the white population was overwhelmingly Protestant and those who did not come from the British Isles (e.g., Swedes, Dutchmen, and Germans) were generally Nordic and assimilable.
But my ancestors did not do that. Money, religion, tolerance, and ideology were more important to WASPs than racial, ethnic, and religious homogeneity. So they opened the country up to progressively more heterogeneous immigrant populations, whom they were glad to exploit economically even as they were loath to grant them full social recognition as Americans.
Today, however, practically every white American I know is of mixed European ancestry. I am too, since the Scots and English are different peoples. This blending is even more prominent among racially-conscious whites. Last year, I polled a group of racially conscious Whites. Of 43 people who were present, all but two were of mixed European ancestry, and those two were born in Europe.
So there is something anachronistic about an insistence on WASP nationalism as opposed to White Nationalism, since WASPs are a disappearing ethnic group and blended European-Americans (generic whites) are a growing group. If whites are going to survive in North America, it will require putting aside such anachronistic, Old-World, petty forms of nationalism and embracing a broader yet thinner concept of white identity. But really, that is thick enough, since we are still one big extended family with deep common roots going back to the Ice Ages, common roots that predate modern petty nationalisms, the blue-eyed mutation, the emergence of Indo-European languages and religion, and even the splitting off of Nordic and Mediterranean and other subraces.
Mencken pointed out 100 years ago that Anglo-Saxonism was already becoming an anachronism. He also said that the most signal Anglo-Saxon traits were greed and cowardice, That strikes me as mean but correct. WASPs controlled America, but they gave it away out of greed and cowardice (and by prizing moral and religious abstractions over kinship).
At White Nationalist gatherings, I notice that it is the people whom WASPs looked down upon, the “ethnics” and Catholics — the Irish and the Italians — who are among the feistiest advocates for our people. So in the context of the White Nationalist movement, there is something morally obscene about the people who gave the country away trying to lord it over the people who fought hardest to keep it.
WASP nationalism is anachronistic, petty, and divisive. It is an impediment rather than an aid in the survival of our race on this continent.
I forgot to mention that it is also almost impossible to find people of pure Anglo Saxon heritage anymore.
For example, my mother’s family was a mixture of German immigrants from the 1800s with Dutch immigrants from an earlier time. And my father’s family was mostly from Czechoslovakia.
It is almost unheard of for America whites to have pure Anglo lineage or pure Italian lineage or pure German lineage.
That is why Jared Taylor advocates for a “white” identity.
If Taylor went around looking for other pure-bred Anglo Americans, he would be a lonely man.
Even Jews have not managed to maintain pure. There is a frequent occurrence of them marrying outside their genetic lineage (e.g., Tim Wise–the “anti-racist”).
Micky Meadows,
Not many Europeans will wish to grovel in the imaginary muck and worship at the feet of the almighty Northerners with you. Looks like you’re having fun though, keep it up.
Andrew Fraser,
You are truly out of touch. Writing off anyone but Anglo-Saxons (including Germans, oddly) is to write off … over 90% of the white nationalist ‘movement’, along with European nationalists. It appears you are resentful of being made to stand alone in self-denial, which no one would argue; your solution is to pretend that you stand alone as a superior specimen of humanity, which, of course, makes everyone else feel bad, and makes you look like a c*nt.
“Are not such people detached, spiritually and genetically, from any really existing European race?”
Get over yourself and go read about the coefficient of inbreeding. I’ll start you off with a painful fact whence everything follows: the English are the most outbred (or exogamous) population on Earth. To spell it out for you: the English themselves are more detached from each other than any other human tribe. The reason you find yourself standing alone, and Jews, Italians and the rest standing more or less together, isn’t mystical or abstract. It is a consequence of breeding strategy. Before you affect to insult others for their racial heritage, mind the “thin, attenuated” character of your people’s bloodline — and the miserable, bloodless attitudes which stem from it.
ciao,
- uh, a euromutt
“It is almost unheard of for America whites to have pure Anglo lineage or pure Italian lineage or pure German lineage.”
Oh well. Let’s all take our eyes off the goal of adapting to the age without being completely genetically submerged, and instead wring our hands about not being PURE, and how the capitalists brought in those filthy Italians and Pollacks, and pity poor Andrew Fraser for being uniquely beleaguered in an age where all whites are held to be innately evil and guilty of some original sin.
We absolutely must not allow ourselves fellow-feeling and the “blurring” of subracial distinctions. That would be unfair to the vanishing Anglo-Saxons, the very best of our kind. And we must be fair!!
@Elie:
Well, in regards to my first comment, I actually don’t know what Goebbels thought about Marx.
I thought I read somewhere that he agreed with him, but I may be wrong.
Either way, he obviously didn’t think too highly of democratic, capitalist, Anglo England or America, considering his radical politics.
But whatever, I digress.
My point is that there really is something destructive about Anglo capitalism.
It really isn’t just the Jewish intellectuals or the lack of ethnic loyalty among whites.
There really is something inherently destructive in the system.
It is very obvious that wasps have made many great accomplishments. But they also seem to be number one at rapid racial suicide.
If wasps feel they are superior then it is up to non-wasp whites job to show them that they are not. It’s the competitive spirit. Just like whites should compete with and overcome non-whites as a group.
Personally, I feel that ALL whites have enough in common as to form a nation to the exclusion of non-whites who are neither possible nor desirable to assimilate.
“I’m part of the European people but I’m not part of the elite who produced the vast majority of all the things that tend to make us feel like we are special.”
I’m sorry sir, but do you know who Nikola Tesla is?
Actually it is Никола Тесла.
Yes, that’s right, the Slavic untermensch, the victim of capitalist Anglo-America, JP Morgan, and all the other “elites.”
Let’s see, what did this inferior white man do?
Oh darn! That’s right, he invented AC current, the current that not only your computer runs on, but your whole HOUSE!
NO WAY!
All the Anglo-Americans in the early 1900s looked like they saw the light of God when Tesla presented to them AC current.
Those uncivilized, candle burning, DC current using peasants looked like an African tribe that saw white man for the first time!
But of course, they still treated him like dirt, made money off his work, and he dies penniless.
At least when we study Electricity and Magnetism (Physics II in college), we learn that the unit of the magnetic field is a Tesla.
No thanks, of course, to the inferior Anglo-Saxons.
RE Prof. Fraser’s claim that “Greg Johnson of Counter-Currents Publishing is especially blasé. Indeed, he celebrates the ‘blending’ of European ethnicities into ‘White Americans.’” Here is the source he cites. Judge the accuracy of his characterization for yourself:
2. What is White Nationalism?
White Nationalism is a political philosophy that seeks to define national identity in racial rather than religious, cultural, or creedal terms. White Nationalism makes the most sense in the context of European colonial societies like the United States, in which older white ethnic identities have been undermined through the blending of distinct European immigrant stocks, creating an ever more blended, generic white identity.
White Nationalism also makes sense in the context of competition from other races, which tend to see themselves and whites in simple racial terms. Even whites who do not see themselves merely as whites may be forced to do so as racial conflict increases, simply because their enemies will see and treat them as generically white.
In Europe, where old national and regional identities remain robust, generic whiteness and White Nationalism, if adopted as one’s primary identity and political philosophy, would actually promote the breakdown of distinct identities and the homogenization of Europe. However, a sense of European identity can still supervene upon more compact national and regional identities.
This wider sense of European identity can actually work to preserve particular identities in two important ways. First, it can help to prevent conflict among European peoples. Second, it can help European peoples to unite in the face of non-white immigration, which is primarily organized under the banner of Islam.
For more on these topics, see:
Michael O’Meara, “Toward the White Republic“ http://www.counter-currents.com/2010/09/toward-the-white-republic-2/
Ted Sallis, “Pan-European Preservationism“ http://www.counter-currents.com/2012/05/pan-european-preservationism/
Andrew Hamilton, “Pan-Nationalism“ http://www.counter-currents.com/2011/05/pan-nationalism/
http://www.counter-currents.com/2012/06/frequently-asked-questions-part-1/
@PIGS killed america: Yes, my great grandfathers working in your coal mines and railroads clearly admitted Jews to positions of power in banking, law, academia, and politics.
If you’d have let any of my great-grandparents make the decisions, there wouldn’t have been a single Jew (or Muslim) in the Western hemisphere.
I don’t think the term WASP was ever intended to be used exclusively as a descriptor for the English in America. But, was used in general to describe the White Protestant peoples of North Western Europe. That’s how Kenneth L. Roberts, Thomas E. Watson, Madison Grant, and others used it.
@PIGS killed america:
Yes, and that is why the entire Anglo world put all their efforts into stomping the German race into the ground and then infecting them with their democracy and capitalism all over again so that the Jews and third worlders felt welcomed.
The Italians, Germans, and some Eastern Europeans would be as strong as ever if it wasn’t for the sickness of cosmopolitanism that was not really FORCED on them by the Jews as much as it was FORCED on them by the western capitalists.
The Anglos and their crummy system is also why Germany was starving in the 1930s.
I guess that’s how they wanted to treat the people who created Bach, Beethoven, Mozart, and much of Calculus.
@Athanasius:
I think it is pretty clear that the parasites followed their hosts over from Eastern & South Eastern Europe.
By the same token, I just don’t see the Italians, the Irish, the Poles, etc. putting up a fight against their fellow Roman Catholics from Mexico & Latin America who are invadintg the United States. It ain’t going to happen. We White Protestants are on our own! The sooner we realize it, the better off everyone will be.
I strongly doubt that Darwin, Newton, Reynolds, Coleridge, Chaucer, Shakespeare, Brunel, Stevenson, faraday, etc etc were particularly Scandinavian. As you said, the maternalDNA in the British Isles was static. Input from elsewhere has not impacted on a very large scale, even among Y DNA. Our outside aristocrats were as likely to be Welsh, Scot, Breton, Gascon, Aquitanian, Basque, Galician as German. Even then the differences are microscopically small.
Really Nordicism? Fecking hell what tosh.
Look at the aggression this article has provoked. It is exhibit A in how untrustworthy and downright ethnocentric the Italians, Irish, Poles get when
confronted with the more successful English, German and French.
The Spanish are somewhat outside of this. They have south America. The Russians don’t appear to care much. They have their own proud history.
The first few generations of any race are mixed, but as time goes on they stabilize into one distinct people. The same was true of the Romans, who started off as different tribes of Mediterraneans and eventually grew and formed one unique race, the Roman race.
This same thing could have happened in America, with different types of Europeans mixing into one new American race. It never happened due to bad philosophy and jewish meddling.
I can’t believe that the exquisitely racially unblemished über-WASP Mr. Fraser decided to approving quote from the loathsome and suspiciously effeminate neocon Michael Novak. Slovaks, really? I’ve met maybe three in my life.
@Tom: So we have Anglo-Saxon only, Nordic only, and your vague Germanic/Celtic Protestant only. You can’t even agree which group of Northwestern Europe should putting up this fight. Good luck with that. What are you going to do with all the Germanic people here that hate Christianity (presumably including your beloved Protestantism)?
@Elie:
So what would you replace Anglo Capitalism with, a utopian vision?lol What’s your highest good and how is it superior to the targets of your critique?
@Tom:
Look, you need to get over Christianity.
Why do you even care anymore if someone comes from a Protestant background or a Catholic background?
Wanna know a secret? My grandfather was a Presbyterian reverend; And I’m an atheist.
Religion is respectable only as a cultural relic.
But, I’m sure most people here want a NEW social, political, and spiritual movement.
Who cares about being a white Protestant? Go join the Ku Klux Klan. Oh, wait, that’s dead too.
Times have changed. You need to face it or else you will be right about what you said: you white Protestants WILL be on your own with your regressive thinking.
@STARSCREAM:
Probably Nordic socialism is a pretty good example of the way white people should be living.
But you really need to see the fault that capitalism has in destroying race and culture.
Every time you see a brown, mixed, Brazilian, you should know that it wasn’t Jewish intellectualism that did that. It was the stupid idea that Anglos had–that they could live forever on top of classes of people who hate them.
Isn’t that just unnatural?
Black slavery, Brown slavery, Haiti, etc.
Anglos came up with that idea, not Germans, not Russians, etc.
This is not JUST a society created by Jewish intellectuals, it is also a society and a condition that was unnaturally created by the stupidity and lack of foresight of this economic system.
The Founding Fathers didn’t even expect the American republic to last 200 years, according to historian Carol Berkin.
They weren’t interested in long term racial growth. They were here to spread the Gospel and get rich.
Neo confederates don’t have much truck with the GOP.
I strongly suspect the white vote in the old confederate states will revive aspects of the CSA. They are like Rhodesians or Boers. Culturally and intellectually ready to take on Black Run America. No bombardments of forts but refusal to play along with the multicult any longer.
These folk are English, Irish, Welsh, Scot sone French a few Germans.
@Elie:
Don’t blame the Jews for everything.
The British are the ones who were signing the Balfour Declaration with Jews and stigmatizing fascism.
And the Americans and British were the ones who looted Europe in WWII.
WHAT A GREAT UTOPIA THEY CREATED, ISN’T IT?
@Elie: This isn’t directed at you per se, but just as a general comment:
We’d be better off if all accepted freedom of conscience, but that Christianity is a fundamental part of our culture. The problems start when people begin to whine about how Christianity was forced on their Saxon/Celtic/Slavic ancestors–as if they have some kind of insight into their ancestors living 1200 years ago–who left no written records–as opposed to their ancestors of the past 1200 years.
In any event, the Christians shouldn’t demand orthodox belief (of non-religious or other other Christians, Tom), but neither should the non-religious try to obliterate the praxis of the past millennium. That is the only true folk culture that we have.
Moreover, constantly attacking Christianity is going to drive many people away. I’m not ashamed to admit that I’m a believer, nor am I afraid to defend them. But this isn’t the place for that, and here it is a distraction. Our goal should be to be independent of Jewish intellectual and artistic influence and African and Asian (and Mestizo) genetic influence–then WE can decide as a civilization what religion and morals we will follow. In the current situation, it is simply impossible to make this type of decision without outside influence.
For now, we should accept each other and work together for our group interests. I have group interests in common with all of you, as you do with me, whether you belong to the same church that I do or not. The truth is that if the current regime continues, my church will be persecuted to oblivion by Jews and Muslims. I’m not sure why so many WN’s here want to offer me the same deal.
Some of you seem to want merely to sow division. Ok, you don’t want Catholics, you don’t want Orthodox, you don’t want Christians at all, you don’t want swarthy Greeks and Italians, you don’t want stupid Slavs and Celts, you don’t want Germanic people not from the British Isles (or you only want Scandinavians). Pretty soon all you’re going to be left with are two English atheists in black t-shirts who listen to the same death metal band and masturbate all day. Good luck with that movement.
@Athanasius:
You miss what I’m saying, the people who popularized the term Wasp were referring to the White Protestant peoples of North West Europe who pioneered America & founded the United States. The Irish Catholics, and the German Catholics came later after 1848. The exceptions don’t make the rule. LOL.
@Tom: No one here is denying that Protestants from the British Isles founded the USA. Hooray! You want everyone else to leave the country?
Pretty much every white ethnic group acknowledges and to some extent (some more than others) adopts “Wasp” culture. What more do you want?
Commentators are denying that they should attempt to keep it though. The oozing pus of jealousy and resentment is stinking up this thread.
@Athanasius: He—probably his equally mindless pal PIGS killed America (aka dixie, I’ll bet), too—seems to thinks you and other Orthodox Christians are Protestants. If he ever wakes up to the realization that Calvin and Luther were once Catholics before they apostatized, he’ll go into cardiac arrest.
If the Anglo Saxon is so contemptible, why is that every other ethnic falls over itself to live among us? From Britain, Canada, Australia and the US. These whiners must love us, they protest too much.
The largest Francophone population outside Paris today is London. Same with German. Farsi, Urdu it’s the same the list is endless.
@Athanasius:
Please, North Western Europe is not just the British Isles it includes all of the English, Scotch-Irish, Scots, Welsh, Germanics, Dutch, Swiss, Scandinavians and the French Huguenots. In other words the Protestant areas and peoples of NW Europe. The people who came to America to escape from the Catholics. LOL.
Do you think the Catholic politicians are going to do anything to stop a Mexican/Latin American Catholic invasion of the US? Please. We are on our own and better had realize it.
@Dan:
Anglo-Saxons are contemptible only for their inborn egalitarianism and idealism that leads to the destruction of the very societies that they found.
Just because everyone wants to live in the nations you create doesn’t mean you should let them in. Why didn’t your ethnicity ever learn that very simple concept?
I’m not sure which is worse for WN :
- Wasp arrogance.
- Non- wasp resentment.
@Dan:
“If the Anglo Saxon is so contemptible, why is that every other ethnic falls over itself to live among us?”
So you consider living under the global capitalist economic system that has roots in every single country, from China to India and Mexico, them wanting to come live among “us”?
That’s pretty funny.
I took engineering classes with a Chinese guy and he is here because he is getting education and getting it paid for. But he wants to go back to China.
Other Asians, Korean, etc (I’ve met them all in my diversity land of a school), constantly travel to Singapore and other Asian countries.
They are extreme about their roots to Asia and show absolutely no intention of staying here, unless they can get something.
THAT is the cosmopolitan system of global capitalism.
And you Anglos created it.
Good job.
What culture are you trying to save? One of buying, selling, and owning?
THAT IS WHY THE ENGLISH WERE SO PHILO-SEMITIC!
Don’t you get it?
Anglos and Jews were always in a loving relationship because they celebrated their love for rootlessness and cosmopolitanism together!
We created the cosmopolis?
The first thing you ought to do then, is to get the hell out of the Cosmopolis. Save your soul from the Englishman. Quick don’t hesitate.
@Elie:
Sorry, the Anglos weren’t all rootless. But they definitely were cosmopolitan.
They definitely started the idea of going to other lands and setting up slavery, an unsustainable system that haunts ALL whites to this day.
They definitely made deals with the Rothschilds like the Balfour Declaration.
They definitely tried to starve Germany to death.
They definitely did care at all about the Eastern Europeans who had to live under Communism; that is, until to started to spread around the world.
They were definitely the originators of this globally-lined world we live in where race and origin means nothing as long as you can buy, sell, or work.
And of course the Jewish intellectuals were equally responsible, but the Anglos loved the Jews.
Meanwhile, Peter Brimelow names and shames the Jew.
http://www.vdare.com/articles/israel-greece-show-mitt-romney-how-to-handle-illegal-immigration
It appears philosemitic WN is dead.
@Dan:
Trust me, if America gets bad, I’m moving to Europe.
And the Republican-types can have fun with all the Mexican day laborers, dual citizens, Jews, and Chinese and Indians here to get what they can.
Then you can sit there and say it was all the Jews who opened the doors.
Nothing else.
Even though OTHER peoples seem to be utterly immune to Jewry (Japan).
But of course there is no inherent flaw in the Anglo system that made it a philo-Semitic magnet and accelerated its decline into multiculturalism.
Sure.
Slavery was perfectly sustainable. Evangelist reformers (US) however, raised armies to genocide those whites. 1/5 white Southerners were killed.
In the UK Evangelist reformers lobbied to end slavery and did so. Plunging the Caribbean into poverty it has yet to emerge from.
Slavery works awfully, unspeakably well. And in the context of the New World British slaving was simply a borrow culture from the Mediterranean: Spanish, Sardinians, Corsicans, Moroccans, Sephardi, Algerians, Maltese, Venetian, Cretans, Cypriots, Egyptians Libyans were all toiling away in Sugar plantations for centuries before. Then it spread to Andalusia and the Portuguese took it to Sau Tomas, from there to Recife, where it jumped into Barbados and Jamaica. Pardon US please form out competing the WOG Mediteranean peoples at their own diabolical game. the British figured out there was money to be made from it long after Italians, Spanish, Arabs, Jews and Byzantines were making a packet from the Sugar trade.
@Dan:
Really? I just don’t believe that considering that it FAILED everywhere.
I can’t think of one former slave colony that is not now a paradigm for a multicultural “paradise.”
Let’s see, Brazil (future America) where most people are mixed race browns and there are racial quotas on whites, Haiti, America, British Isles, Caribbean, etc.
It has never worked. And now all we have are billions of mixed-race people looking to swamp whitey.
@Dan:
If the Jew is our intellectual and spiritual disaster, then global capitalism and slavery was and is our social disaster.
@uh:
It’s not grovelling….it’s a statement of the reality of European history. All or most European countries have Nordic higher social classes. The eugenics programs of the 20th century explicitly favoured Nordic features. What effect do you think that was going to have on the lower social classes who were primarily of indigenous descent in that European country?
The European aristiocracy and higher classes only distinguished national levels in terms of competing vehicles of power. They married amongst the European wide aristocracy. Same went for the higher classes.
It went like this. You marry in your class or above. If there are no suitable mates in your country you look for a suitor in an appropriate class in another European country. If you can’t find any, and you are female, you marry an older male in the same or higher class, and so on.
Marrying down was really the last resort.
We talk about the Jews having features so being a race. But the higher classes and aristocracy *totally* associated themselves with features. A person had the look of aristocracy, the look of a gentleman. A lower class person looked lower class. It was racial thing.
While we’re on the subject, the lower classes – effectively a different race within the white group, made up of indigenous populations with some Nordic admixture – were treated really really badly. In the medieval times if you so much raised your eyes to meet the eyes of a Noble, you’d be run through with a sword on the spot.
If you look at the way the aristocracy treated one another, it was very eugenic and very ruthless. People say it was a mark of those times, but I don’t think so. I think it was racial behavour. The Nordics were definitely superior, definitely a warrior type people. Very ruthless. Definitely going places, and definitely not planning to take any passengers.
This isn’t grovelling…this is just calling things as they are. There’s a subset of Europeans who are entirely or much more of this northerner ancestry than the majority of Europeans. The subset is responsible primarily for the vast majority of European achievement. Their average IQ must be way above the Jewish.
There’s recent scientific evidenve that European people with higher IQ’s, are statistically more likely to be more closely related to oneanother. Nuff said.
@Dan:
If the Anglo Saxon is so contemptible, why is that every other ethnic falls over itself to live among us?
Oh boy, I have a better response to this one:
Why are entire nations trying to block our influence. In particular Russia and Iran want to keep themselves pure of western influence. Don’t they know what they’re missing?
Actually they do. Muslim preachers talk about avoiding western values like the plague.
Now, they ARE CERTAINLY NOT talking about western influences like mathematics, science, Beethoven. Oh no! When they say western values, they specifically mean greed, promiscuity, rap music (makes big money), pop stars, mass entertainment, rootlessness, etc.
And even in Europe (besides Russia) there is a lot of anti-Americanism.
Ever hear the song Amerika by Rammstein? They mock us.
Forgive me for clucking my tongue a little, but it appears White Nationalists have learned nothing from World War II.
Ironically, two of my favorite NS hardcore bands, one German and one Russian, released a joint EP a few years back, Unity in Action.
A bunch of “dumb skinheads” understand the futility of revanchist passions in this age of universal dispossession — and White Nationalists are still arguing about WASPs and Italians.
Good show. Back to Counter-Currents.
“There’s recent scientific evidenve that European people with higher IQ’s, are statistically more likely to be more closely related to oneanother. Nuff said.”
Bad news, groveler: high IQ — except among Ashkenazi Jews and Brahmins — is strongly correlated with outbreeding, low IQ with inbreeding. File the latter under “Things Everyone Knew Already”.
Do more homework. Enjoy the taste of dirt. I stand with the awful ‘dysgenic’ majority.
I see the Anglo-Saxon as a failed ethnicity that invented liberal universalism and will be destroyed by its own creature. The future lies with pan-Europeanism. Look at the comments from all over the world to Golden Dawn’s youtube videos. The One Worlders want globalization and they shall get it. White Nationalism is itself going global. WPWW!
@Mickey Meadows:
I think you would be good friends with Heinrich Himmler with your “theory” about this long-lost elite class.
I believe, correct me if I’m wrong, that MacDonald wrote in one of his books that Jews actually increased their intelligence over a long period of time.
You make things sound so black and white that it is almost certain you are more of a day dreamer than someone with something serious to say.
What anthropologists have said these things?
Was this Nordic class just dropped out of the sky from God? (That’s actually what they used to believe–that they were divine.)
Jews have no Nordic in them. Neither do East Asians. How did they get so intelligent.
You see, when you start talking about race like this, you leave the reality of constantly changing genes, mutations, and a much more complex reality, and start talking about things that really sound to black and white to be true.
@uh:
No…I agree with you completely. We need to be one identity for now. That was my whole point….it’s just that it’s such a touchy subject people tend to read it the wrong way.
My point is that there is no “Anglo Saxon” people. It’s not like that. Europeans were arranged hierarchally and the elites were more closely related to eachother than to the lower classes of their own country.
Thus, it’s a bum deal trying to go down the route of saying there’s a special ‘Anglo Saxon’ group. What there is…and we already know and accept this…what there is, is a kind European ideal…and basically that ideal looks pretty Nordic.
We already know this…they are our core. They are our Cohens. This isn’t grovelling. this is unifying. We are a racial people, and that means we have within a lot of diversity, and it’s a hierarchical situation, or a situation involved concentric circles. That’s how healthy peoples are ordered.
I think the colonies…America, NZ, Aus etc…I think there was more mixing between the higher caste groups and ordinary groups, as a result of breakdown of those social groups.
I think the result of that was to spread Nordic features more widely. But also, obviously, to dilute those features somewhat. That is to say, the lower classes benefited and were risen up, while the higher classes were levelled off somewhat by the same process.
That’s what I think anyway. I’d be interested to see whether a higher percentage of higher classes went out there in proportionate terms. That was certainly the case in Africa…almost entirely an aristocracy endeavour.
@Elie:
Let me guess, the Jews increased their intelligence by intermarrying with elites and “stealing” Nordic genes.
Because the peak of all humanity was, is, and always will be that Nordic man who was put on earth by God to spread his genes and civilization?
I just don’t think evolutionary anthropology works like that. Not that I’m an expert.
That system of course was ended by evangelizing English.
On another note, slavery in Brazil, Cuba, Jamaica etc provided other sources of spice AKA Sugar, and this destroyed Islam. They no longer supplied the spice.
Slavery in the US and British islands was of a much smaller magnitude than that practiced by Portugal and Spain. 500,000 slaves were shipped to the US all told from a trade that imported 12 million to Latin or Romance speaking nations. So there is no special affinity between slaving and Anglo Saxon or British culture. Anglo Slaving– It’s a myth perpetuated by whinging WOGs and specious Med folk who are jealous of
other people outplaying them at their own dirty
games. Cyprus and Crete and other Greek islands were Sugar plantations centuries before Haiti. Luckily evangelizing Brits put a Stop to the trade. But still you complain.
@Elie:
I’m not saying that only Nordics have any value. Nor that they are the only ones to produce high intelligence. Jews probably did carefully absorb some good European genes…that would make sense because as we know they are a supremely strategic and ethnocentric group. So if they saw a value they would have done it
East Asians produced one of the other great races of the world. There’s no point comparing. They are very accomplished. I think Europeans do outshine them but I would certainly acknowledge them at the same table.
Maybe by using the word ‘Nordic’ I am making a mistake and giving the wrong impression. I don’t think it’s that much different in East Europe. The aristocracy didn’t distinguish whether they Russian or German or Greek. The queen of England married a Greek. But he was Greek aristocracy…genetically closer to the queen than someone from Surrey.
Why is this so hard? The other day, I heard someone telling off Noble Lord, a black guy, for not being glad to live in world were there are superior peoples and groups. Well guess, most of us live in that world too. There are superior cores of the White people, who are more closely related to oneanother. Or there were.
This is history Elle. I’m not making it up. The Normans invaded England in 1066 and basically parachuted a Noble class over the top of the country, and ruled that country from then and never left. Are still here. And yet, the english have something like 1% Norman genes.
I hope the Anglos here don’t think we’re dumping on them just because they’re Anglos; we’re dumping on them because they betrayed their race for a few shekels.
“They are no philosophical race, these English.”
-F.N.
English ideas of utilitarianism (what is “good” is whatever works; you see this mentality in virtually American politician), pragmatism, and liberalism are partially what got us here.
“We already know this…they are our core. They are our Cohens. This isn’t grovelling. this is unifying. ”
Well, it is romanticism. They’re not my core. I gave up Aryan-worship years ago and am better for it. I refuse to worship a subgroup that isn’t mine (though I am half Anglo).
The unfortunate thing about Europe is that it is the original melting pot. Same time, they’ve been living among each other for quite a long time, and have probably spilled each other’s blood for the last time. It’s pretty effing absurd to stir up the pot when a real modus vivendi has been reached after, you know, thousands of years sharing the same relatively small living space.
If the Union has failed because the Mediterraneans and Irish are corrupt, so be it: let’s acknowledge that, and rejoice in its death. This oughtn’t be an excuse for some so-called White Nationalists to act like petty chauvinists at what is, of course, a bunch of mixed-race whites. I’m very sorry Anglos no longer have pure nations. If it’s any consolation, Italians, French, Swiss, Austrians, Germans, Swedes, Russians and Greeks are dealing with the same problem. The reverend Fraser and whiter-than-thou Dan seem to have lost sight of that entirely for the sake of rebuking other Europeans for polluting their graces.
Whatever — I dislike this blog already. No more from me.
White identity has always been comparatively shallow.
1. Yet one may rightly ask whether it is not the same amongst all the races? In Mother Africa, tribalism reigns, and blacks are “black” only on the outside, and to casual observers. In Asia, Chinese and Japanese are not brothers. And within Chinese, differences among the mainlanders, the HK group, Taiwanese, plus the general Chinese diaspora manifest. Moslems? They are certainly brothers and tied by religion, unless we are speaking Sunni or Shia, and then all bets are off.
2. As far as WASP? Wilmot Robertson always quipped that the W is redundant, inasmuch as he knew of no indigenous ASP’s that were not White.
3. I suspect that the varieties of White Europeans have more in common with their extended Caucasian family than Whites in general have with Jews, and certainly much less than with negroes, who by their physiognomy exist as an almost different species altogether. However, for reasons no one has quite yet explained very well, Whites as a whole seem intent on killing each other off.
4. With the last point in mind, so-called White Nationalists are the worst offenders. They may not be “killing” each other but, on the whole, the different iterations are whiny, bitchy, and self-important to the point of exclusion. I think many simply enjoy arguing about who in their minds is a whiter shade of pale. Even the various early Marxists factions probably had more cohesion than our WNs.
@uh:
It’s a pity you want to go, but I really don’t think what I’m pointing to needs to be a problem. I don’t worship the more core European groups. It’s really not like that. But part of being a race realist is being…real about it. Is there anything I have said that is factually, historically, not true?
Now of course it’s a more complex…some of it not mentioned because I didn’t know it, and some of it because I had to the length of reasonable comment to say it in.
“The Normans invaded England in 1066 and basically parachuted a Noble class over the top of the country. . . . And yet, the english have something like 1% Norman genes.”
That is contradictory.
I thought the story you were telling was that this group called the Nordics either 1) were dropped down from God or 2) were the ULTIMATE peak of all European evolution and that all elites of Europe had this superior ancestor in their lineage and that all cultural achievement was from Nordic genes.
And I say that that really doesn’t sound like real evolutionary antropology.
I don’t believe it really worked like that.
Maybe it has SOME truth to it, but it is too black and white.
I don’t think Jews got their intelligence from nordic genes. But I do think that they have proven that evolution has NOT reached its peak.
@PIGS killed america:
Yup, the PIGS killed 700,000 WASPs alone between 1861-1865.
@Dan:
The Italians are a failure? In the UK we are still using the roads they built 2,000 years ago.
Yes, Italians were total failures.
That’s why Galileo Galilei was trying to convince everyone that the Earth revolved around the sun.
The master race was still believing in flat Earth theories and voodoo.
@Elie:
Mickey Meadows probably will say that Galileo was actually a Nordic or that his genes could be traced back to the divine masters.
What about Konstantin Novoselov (the youngest noble laureate since 1973) who is a non-Jewish Russian? He doesn’t look Nordic. I bet if you tested him, you’ll trace his genetic back to that long-lost master race of the Normans or something.
@Greg Johnson:
Greg says:
He also said that the most signal Anglo-Saxon traits were greed and cowardice, That strikes me as mean but correct. WASPs controlled America, but they gave it away out of greed and cowardice (and by prizing moral and religious abstractions over kinship).
Well that is great to hear from a “White Nationalist”. There is something sad about a person seeing only greed and cowardice as the most important traits of Anglo Saxons. Good Lord.
But note the illogic. Because after telling us what race traitors Anglo Saxons and WASPs are, he ends with this:
WASP nationalism is anachronistic, petty, and divisive. It is an impediment rather than an aid in the survival of our race on this continent.
Catch that? These same WASPs who are natural born race traitors, had better not exhibit any concerns for race, they need to avoid any sense of nationalism, just blend in – and this is just after telling us how WASPs didn’t have any concern for such things anyway!
There is nothing wrong with various groups of Whites preserving their sense of identity (Italians, Germans, Poles, Anglo-Saxons) and it strikes me as bizarre for someone pro-White to undercut it. I certainly don’t want any divisiveness over White ethnic differences, but there is no reason to single out a White group and say they have to be, in effect, ‘blended” out of existence. Something spooky about that.
@Mickey Meadows:
What you are saying makes perfect sense. I have no trouble saying Nordics are generally the best the White race has to offer, despite the fact that I don’t look Nordic nor do most likely have much true Nordic blood. But facts are what they are.
This doesn’t mean that the rest of Whites don’t have great value, nor does it mean that some Nordics can’t be dumb, lazy and defective. But, as a population, they are probably at the pinnacle of Whites.
And humans can interbreed and obviously do. We have to accept that some groups are “Whiter” than other groups. You can see that in Iran. Some look very White, some halfway White, and some not White at all. So, I think if human progress means anything to you, having more of the “really White” types is valuable.
>>>Oh no! When they say western values, they specifically mean greed, promiscuity, rap music (makes big money), pop stars, mass entertainment, rootlessness, etc.<<< pure trash, beneath stupid.
Do you (or the others mentioned) think that we CHOSE to create this current sh$t house? Whites have not been in control of this society/government/culture for 100 years. Information- almost all- is under jew control. Religion is jewed. Almost all have been bought off or paid off. All tech is under jew control. The coming crash will be jew instigated. The bill of rights have been jew-shredded. We live in a jew dictatorship after 911.
WHITES HAVE LIITLE TO SAY ABOUT OUR OWN COUNTRY, SO DON'T BLAME US.
@TabuLa Raza:
I think you took my comment out of context without reading all the other ones I made.
You don’t have to go back and read all my other comments, I’ll just tell you what I meant.
I was going on about how Anglo-Saxons had created a destructive system. That system was international capitalism.
Also, I accused the Anglos of being philo-Semitic.
I pointed out that while the Germans purged themselves of Jewish intellectualism, the English were happy to sign the Balfour Declaration with them, fill their universities with their intellectualism, and house their nobility (e.g., the Rothschilds).
And I said that THIS SYSTEM, this global capitalist, open democracy, system is NOT all because of Jewish intellectuals and political movements.
The Anglos screwed themselves by spreading their system.
And don’t forget that they forced a Bolshevik victory on Europe.
They didn’t care about anything except their egalitarian democracy and global capitalism.
And they still do.
“Do you (or the others mentioned) think that we CHOSE to create this current sh$t house?”
No. The Iranians are openly anti-Semitic. And Putin, although not an open anti-Semite, purged Russia of the Jewish oligarchs that controlled its politics. And the Russians want to distance themselves from us.
@Elie:
I also pointed out that the Anglo-Saxon countries seem to be the biggest magnets for our problems: Multiculturalism, leftist intellectualism, out of touch white elites.
Do you think that’s just a coincidence?
I think not.
@Elie:
Oh, I think Russia had a fair amount of leftist intellectualism. So did Germany (and still does). You can still speak freely in the US without being thrown in prison on race issues, whereas in most non-Anglo White countries, they give you serious jail time (this may change soon). So, I don’t think the picture is that clear cut.
Freedom of speech is a wonderful thing. I notice the National Socialists, and many White Nationalists, NEVER acknowledge that “hate speech” laws are absent in America and a problem in Europe. I sadly suspect, because most of them have no problem with government dictated speech codes — THEY just want to be the ones doing the dictating.
@TabuLa Raza:
I know my thoughts sound repulsive to you, but TOO isn’t a community of an anti-intellectual cult like the skinheads.
I think it is dishonest and to not point out that there are other things that are causing this condition of multiculturalism.
I really don’t believe that everyone believes that Jews have imposed it on us by force, especially not after the fact that England was practically married to Jewish nobility and that the Soviet Union would have been crushed if it wasn’t for the Anglo-American and British democracy police.
@Dan
No kidding. I’m still often amazed at how culturally different groups like the Irish are to us, and how hostile even the assimilated Catholic ethnics who came over during the Great Immigration wave are to us. I’ll even admit to be a little bit prejudiced about this; both sides of my family were colonists and arrived before Independence; I really don’t don’t consider 20th century immigrants to be “real Americans” anyway.
I’d make an exception for the indigenous Catholics (i.e., pre-Ellis Island types) but if I was dictator of America I’d deport the rest of them, considering a lot of the reason we came to America was fleeing Catholic persecution in the first place.
Post-WASP America sucks. The worst mistake we ever made was letting in Catholics and Jews.
@Jason Speaks:
“I notice the National Socialists, and many White Nationalists, NEVER acknowledge that “hate speech” laws are absent in America and a problem in Europe.”
I think most WN’s feel that freedom of speech in America is going to be abolished very soon. Hate speech laws in Europe are a result of the outcome of WW2. America wasn’t invaded and destroyed the way Europe was, but it’s going in the same communistic direction, with jews essentially in control of a dysfunctional, totalitarian police state.
@fender:
I agree that freedom of speech may be outlawed in America soon, too. Do WN care? They said precious little about it being destroyed in Europe. Notice, even the Muslims were smart enough to bring up the issue of Holocaust Denial laws in Europe, but I never hear WN do so. They will complain about the specific law, yes, but not the general principle of speech restriction.
For decades, they could have been making the point that there is something fishy about making some forms of history illegal>/i>, but WN never do, I assume because they are cool with stomping on free speech, as long as they do the stomping. I’m getting to be not much of the vocal WN of the past, as you can see.
First of all, let me start off by saying that although I have a lot of respect and admiration for Armenians and Lebanese Christians and their culture, we cannot and should not call them white. Being a Christian does not automatically make you white. That’s absurd.
These two folks are visibly non-white with their short stature, black hair, hooked Semitic noses, etc.
More importantly, they do not consider themselves white and hold us, the real whites, in contempt.
Secondly, what’s with the phrases “French”, “Spanish”, and “Italian”? A white hardworking and creative Catalan/Occitan should not be confused with a lazy, temperamentous Andalusian. Similarly, a Tuscan, Umbrian, Venetian, etc. should not be confused with his Near Eastern countrymen(but not kin) from Naples or Bari.
A white, courageous, consciously white Albanian or Croat should not be confused for a “shady”, manipulative Moden Greek coming from an equally manupulatie state built on propaganda and Western Aid as well as ethinc Albanian revolutionaries like Kolokotroni, Boçari, etc.
There is also a Near Eastern race, guys. Don’t forget. Let’s not get too inclusive with people who don’t want to be included.
Whiteness really stops at the 41st latitude, give or take one degree. Basically, this leaves out the Modern Greeks, Terroni, and andalusians/south Iberians.
Respecting people=/=having to include people.
To illustrate my point better, consider the following:
There is Monica Bellucci, an Umbrian(see map) beauty, a brunette with clearly identifiable delicate Western features. Her manners and conduct are as classy as they can be. Her intelligence can be almost be felt from a distance.
Then, we have the Semitoid suductress named Kim Kardashian. I don’t have to explain further, do I?
Or, there is(was) also Sara Silverman. Is she white to you guys?
There is also Nia Vardalos and so many others. The list is endless.
If you can’t stand Anglo Saxons just find another white nation to pester.
@Athanasius:
!!!!
Anglo-Saxon pride in the U.S. would not be a bad thing. WASPS are the bullseye of anti-white political correctness in the U.S. They accept this status without complaint, providing groups near but not in the bullseye with a “more guilty than us” target. If they started pushing back, perhaps the whole system of anti-white political correctness would be reversed, in this country at least. I would like to see something like an “English American Society.” I did some Google searches for this a while back and found that every type of ancestry except English has a society in this country. There could be no rational objection to something like this by whites who aren’t WASPS. It is just up to WASPs to create it.
On the other hand, whiteness does exist. Genetics show that there is significant relatedness among “whites.” Let’s think in terms of concentric circles and not make it an either-or choice. Dr. Fraser says that whiteness is just an abstraction with no historical meaning, but we can’t just look back. The American identity was forged in a struggle with Great Britain, and a new white identity can be forged in the far greater struggle that lies ahead.
Regarding the civil war and the ethnic make up of each army.
The union mobilized 2.5 million men. 150,000 were blacks. 250,000 were German born. 150,000 were Irish born.
The CSA had perhaps 1,000,000 effectives. Maybe as few as 700,000. The margin between the CSA holding out and being crushed was quite literally those 400,000 German and Irish born troops. Right there–White mercs sent to kill whites defending their homes. Killed on behalf of blacks. Later on the 150,000 assorted blacks
padded that victory margin.
@Elie:
Fraser’s incredible short sightedness is one of the main reasons for the decay of his people.
He uses the term “Anglo-Saxon race” over and over, for example. What ignorance! Had he instead used the term “ethnic group” there would not be a problem, but any person with a minimum amount of historical and anthropological knowledge knows that there is no such thing as an “Anglo-Saxon race”.
There is not even an Anglo-Saxon language any more.
The Norman invasion took care of that.
The Angles, Saxons and Jutes were three German tribes who invaded and conquered Romanized Celtic Britain starting in 448 AD under Hengist and Horsa.
These three German tribes were themselves attacked and partially conquered after 400 years or so by another group of German tribes called the Vikings (Danes and Norwegians), who founded the Danelaw and greatly influenced the West Germanic/Low German language of the Anglo-Saxons with North Germanic/Viking peculiarities.
The Anglo-Saxons, far from being a race, are simply a branch of the Germans. That they are, like all Germans, members of the Nordic/Aryan race is true, but they do not form their own race compared to other Northern Europeans.
The two genocidal world wars that England initiated and fought against Germany, the mother country, can be partially attributed to the ignorant and stupid mentality exhibited by Fraser, with his talk about “the Anglo-Saxon race” as opposed to other Europeans.
The kind of primitive anti-German propaganda during the First World War by the English, where they engaged in massive lying, calling the Germans “Huns”, accusing them of bayoneting Belgian babies, led to the downfall of not only England but the entire Western civilization.
While England’s declaration of war against Germany in 1939 can be directly blamed on the Jews (who owned the mindless, crininal warmonger Churchill) was opposed by many far sighted, wise Englishmen, the Vansittarts, Churchills and the Jews had their way.
The suicide of England and the destruction of Western civilization are best chronicled by English historian David Irving and Patrick Buchanan in his “The Unnecessary War”
Fraser’s never learned the lessons of the 20th century.
Neither did the English Government: in 1992 they erected a statue to Bomber Harris, the mass murdering psychopath, who led the genocidal campaign against Germany’s civilian population.
In Dresden alone he incinerated over 100 thousand Saxon women and children, essentially his on kinfolk.
I sometimes wonder how the tenor of posts here would be affected if everyone’s personal identity had to be known, at least to TOO. By the way, my identity is known to Dr. Kevin MacDonald.
I sometimes wonder how many people who post on this blog are simply trolls whose motivation on TOO is to sow disharmony, discord and to discourage frustrated Whites from wanting to post here.
It is wacko that so many so called pro whites spend most of their time trashing various subsets of whites.
Like as if turning off every Catholic or Christian or southern European or Wasp etc etc …. is a smart move?
Yeah real brilliant.
I sometimes wonder how many people who post on this blog are simply trolls whose motivation on TOO is to sow disharmony
I think that the Original Poster, who is assuredly not anonymous, is sowing disharmony well enough. Both Drew Fraser openly and Lasha Darkmoon pseudonymously have sounded some sour notes with the last two TOO columns.
I should clarify my objection to Michael Novak. Novak is one of these neoconservative Catholics who’s mission is to misdirect the anger and disgust of people like Fraser away from Jews and toward supposedly “unmeltable ethnics”, who were never a divisive, parasitical or mischievous force in American life. The Deer Hunter features a Carpatho-Rus family (i.e., “Slovaks” of a sort) that bears all the costs of lower-middle class patriotism. These Orthodox (or Byzantine Catholic – I forget) Christians send their sons to the killing fields of Viet Nam and work in the mills of Pennsylvania. Does Fraser locate subversion in them?
@EtruscoUmbroPicenoGallic: So that’s it, I’m out? You’re trading a shady, manipulative Greek, the likes of me for some courageous Albanians like Ahmet Zogu and Hashim Thaci?
Richard Pierce, Tom, and Fender will be pleased.
I guess I’ll have to go back to trying to resurrect the Byzantine Empire.
“The genetic foundation of the newly-independent White Republic was based not on blood but on the legal and political legitimacy of the Federalist Constitution of 1787. ”
The possibilities of large-scale non-European immigration and black “equality” were never considered by the founding generation of the US. From Taylor himself:
http://www.amren.com/news/2012/02/what-the-founders-really-thought-about-race/
“There should be little doubt that, by producing a mulatto child, a White/Black couple violates the commandment to honour one’s father and mother.”
That is some very strange exegesis, indeed.
I don’t get these normative arguments on race.
This thread is very interesting.
To Frank Edwin Stone October 2, 2012 – 11:44 pm
Your post says exactly what I and many Germans think: Germans, Dutch, Skandinaviens and Englishmen are all sub-tribes of the larger Germanic tribe. So many Germans do feel neither hate nor friendship with these countries, but the prevailing feeling is that we are one people. Even if the English or Dutch do not think so.
EtruscoUmbroPicenoGallic October 2, 2012 – 9:29 pm
I agree. In Germany there is a saying: “South of Rome starts Africa”. North Italy is seen as a part of Middle Europe. Nonetheless I prefer not to exclude any European person or country. They all belong to us. And if we give away the frontier lands to Islam, Arabia und Africa, next time North Italy will be the frontier land. And that is not to the advantage of Europe. If we admit the loss of Marseille, later we will loose the next cities. It is better, to make Marseille a European city again, slowly, but with a clear aim.
@Tom:
Were Irish here since the 1500s?
Im part Irish and told my forebearer[s] fought in the revolution/ 11776.
@Athanasius:
Sometime ago I said it is best for everyone to stay with his own people in his own country (I still believe that the “minimum friction theory” is correct).
I see WN-ism as an ideology needed to prevent any new war between Europeans and not a vehicle for any kind of supremacism/imperialism/hypocrisy.
Otherwise the jew will have a large intriguing and maneuvering room.
I shall add to the chorus that I don’t see the value of identifying or attempting to preserve the Anglo-Saxons as a race. What differentiates them genetically from the other Nordics? Essentially, the race consists of a lot of Germans (Saxons), a dash of Angles (Belgians), with a serving of Celts (Irish), then add a big helping of Viking invaders (Danes), and don’t forget the Normans (a Norse-Celtic mix). That makes them essentially a hodge-podge of Nordic races. I can’t see any advantage to identifying Anglo-Saxons as a unique group and maintaining their identity apart from other Nordics. I think it is more proper to regard them as part of the Nordic/Germanic group, as the Germans historically have. I do agree with other commenters that the Nordics are the elite, and by far the most accomplished, of the White racial family.
That family has some troubled step-children. For example, the Irish have been serial low-performers, and an IQ map shows that the Celtic areas of the British Isles with lower IQs, with the Irish IQ being in the low 90s. The Slavs are another lower IQ group, it would seem. This doesn’t mean that there are no high performers among those groups, which include a lot of Nordic genes, primarily the result of Scandinavian invaders.
However, as others have pointed out, it is counter-productive to exclude Whites based on these sub-groupings. In North America, the race as a whole is heavily intermixed. As a strategic matter, it makes the most sense to welcome just about anyone who is “White-ish” into the movement. Once an ethnostate is established, things can be sorted out further.
@Dan: Please, get this into your head (same for Andrew Fraser) Australia is not, and never was, a purely Anglo nation.
It was British founded, and included a large minority of Irish from the outset.
My paternal ancestor arrived here in 1802 on board the Atlas II, as did many other Irish, along with other British convicts.
When people today refer to “Invasion Day” they mean by Whites – which includes the Irish, Scots, Welsh and of course the English. One could protest that my ancestors did not have much say in this “invasion”, as they were then occupied in fighting their own national invasion, for which they got transported to Australia.
The point is, for Fraser: you need to broaden your worldview.
For Dan and ilk, whatever you want to say about your country is up to you, but Australia has *always* been a fusion of British and Irish. It is NOT an Anglo nation. We resolved those problems on independence with notions and policies of the type “Australia for the White man”.
I get the impression that however much Mr Fraser may know about American, Canadian and British history he is rather naive with regard his new home, Australia.
@Athanasius:
First off, I was a little unclear and maybe a bit strong—I was writing from a smart phone. My comment sounded like “Modern Greeks are not white”, am I correct? Well, it should sound like this, “Modern Greeks, as a nation collectively, are kind of off-white” instead. For sake of brevity, I also did not mention that of all the three southern “tips” of Europe, Modern Greeks the most Occidental of all three if we take biology, social customs, and mentality into account. ULTIMATELLLLLY, unlike the Copts, Assyrians, and Armenians, yes, Modern Greeks do sort out with the Occident, but they are right on the edge of the Occident and would not be too out of place in the Orient.
As far as trading you goes—now why would I do that for? Even if I considered you as “ultimately Oriental”(which I don’t), proud, consciously and clearly Occidental folks would actually have a common cause with you and, unlike the Islamists in Palestine(who also share a cause with us, to some extent), yes, you would definitely be considered valuable, trustworthy allies. The Greek Orthodox church never neutered itself and many of its leaders are not afraid to speak out against The Tribe’s monkey business. A lot of these evangelical, non-denominational Protestants, on the other hand, are warriors of multiculturalism today and the best soldiers the Zionist state ever had.
@Athanasius:
There have indeed been brave Byzantine generals and fighters during the Greek Rev and the Great Balkan War—I don’t dispute that. At the same time, the Greeks have another, darker side to their historical reputation. As I insinuated earlier, that side was conveniently hidden from view. You mentioned the Byzantines, but those Byzantines and their silly dynastic dispute was the reason the Ottoman plague ever reached Europe and turned millions of white children into janissaries and homosexual servants. Contrary to propaganda, in the early days of it, those Ottoman “Turks” were no slanted eyed yurt-dwelling Mongoloids but who? Well, Islamicized Anatolians/Armenians/Kurds, genealogically, practicing a Persianate culture AND, yes, you guessed it, renegade (and born-again-Muslim, so to speak)Byzantine officials who actually spearheaded much of the deal. Meanwhile, a Padanian general named Giovanni Giustiniani was spearheading the defense of your guys’ Jerusalem at the tip of Thrace with superior plate armor and handgun technology…
As far as shadiness goes—-Not only did 1000s of Greeks convert to Islam(so why are Albanians singled out again?), but many of those who did not went on to actually aid and abet the Ottoman war effort—spies, tactical merchants, cart-pushers, high ranking Christian officials profiteering off the suffering of their co-religionists, you name it. I’ve never heard of Christian Croats or Albanians or any other West Balkan nation, for that matter, engage in this kind of treason.
Albanians are not perfect—they are a real piece of work. I am no fool and know full well what they did to Serb property in Kosovo. But this kind of primitive savagery was once common to all Balkan peoples living under Islamic rule(doesn’t apply to those lucky, brave Croats) until the West, Russia, Venetians, etc. reintroduced civilization there. The Muslim rulers in Serbia and Greece lacked any sort of ethnic consciousness. That is, revolutionary Serb or Greek flags were exclusively flown by Orthodox Christians, raising the sympathy of Russia and the Christian West(Battle of Navarino, anyone?). Not so in Albania where local rulers espoused Islam AND nationalism in a heretical fashion—raising no sympathy among the Christian powers of the day. Had Catholic and Orthodox Albanians taken the reins of power and leadership positions in the nationalist movement from the get go, Albania would have been inundated with a nice aid package, too and would be on par developmentally with Yugoslavia and Greece.
Still, the soul of the real Albanian nation—-the Catholics, the Orthodox on the south, as well as the ardent secularists—are known for strongly associating with white people and distancing themselves from Turks, Arabs, etc. We can talk about Thaci, but let’s not forget to be fair and talk about George Kastrioti, who is seen as the greater hero by a greater many Albanians.
@Karlfried:
I agree. Read what I wrote to Athanasius in my first response to him. Off-white, not non-white. Now, as far as the Copts and other Near Eastern Christians go, I respect and have sympathy for their struggle and they are our allies, but it doesn’t mean we need to include them into our ingroup.
Secondly, normally, Italy is divided into a north, a Center, and a south. Center includes Tuscany, Umbria, Marche, Lazio, Romagna(Ravenna, Rimini, etc.), often Abruzzo, and often Emilia(Parma, Bologna, etc.). Yes, the Center and the North are similar in many ways concerning race and culture(they differ mainly in their weather patterns and presence/absence of a Gallo-Italic dialect).
As far as placing Central and North Italy together with Central Europe, I don’t disagree as long as we do the same service to Catalonia, Occitania, Basque Country, the whole of Croatia(including its rightful Bosnia) and much of Serbia. These regions, I believe, is what those parts of Italy are most analogous to. Maybe we should call that stripe, which happens to share the same latitudes, “South-Central” Europe or “Sub-Mediterranean” Europe.
Together, South Central Europe and North Central Europe—Hungary, Bavaria, Northern France, and Poland, perhaps—-are the heart of White Civilization.
As far as what White Man’s Kosovo is, I don’t know. Tuscany is a good candidate, I think,the best in my op, but it’s not the only one that qualifies. For example, giving that honor to Ile-De-France region would not be incorrect either, but in this case, Kosovo is stolen from us. The Occitan Auvernhe-Lemosin region is another great candidate. It gave us people like the troubadors(who preceded Dante and Petrarch), Blaise Pascal and countless Knights of Malta, the ultimate defenders.
Let me, then raise the following questions: Any other ideas for what our Kosovo is or are? Do we even have a Kosovo? Or should we even be getting into the “Kosovo” mentality in the first place in our unpredictable, tumultuous times?
@Karlfried:
I agree. Read what I wrote to Athanasius in my first response to him. Off-white, not non-white. Now, as far as the Copts and other Near Eastern Christians go, I respect and have sympathy for their struggle and they are our allies, but it doesn’t mean we need to include them into our ingroup.
Secondly, normally, Italy is divided into a north, a Center, and a south. Center includes Tuscany, Umbria, Marche, Lazio, Romagna(Ravenna, Rimini, etc.), often Abruzzo, and often Emilia(Parma, Bologna, etc.). Yes, the Center and the North are similar in many ways concerning race and culture(they differ mainly in their weather patterns and presence/absence of a Gallo-Italic dialect).
As far as placing Central and North Italy together with Central Europe, I don’t disagree as long as we do the same service to Catalonia, Occitania, Basque Country, the whole of Croatia(including its rightful Bosnia) and much of Serbia. These regions, I believe, is what those parts of Italy are most analogous to. Maybe we should call that stripe, which happens to share the same latitudes, “South-Central” Europe or “Sub-Mediterranean” Europe.
Together, South Central Europe and North Central Europe—Hungary, Bavaria, Northern France, and Poland, perhaps—-are the heart of White Civilization.
As far as what White Man’s Kosovo is, I don’t know. Tuscany is a good candidate, I think,the best in my op, but it’s not the only one that qualifies. For example, giving that honor to Ile-De-France region would not be incorrect either, but in this case, Kosovo is stolen from us. The Occitan Auvernhe-Lemosin region is another great candidate. It gave us people like the troubadors(who preceded Dante and Petrarch), Blaise Pascal and countless Knights of Malta, the ultimate defenders.
Let me, then raise the following questions: Any other ideas for what our Kosovo is or are? Do we even have a Kosovo? Or should we even be getting into the “Kosovo” mentality in the first place in our unpredictable, tumultuous times?
To Kevin and other editors: I APOLOGIZE FOR THE DOUBLE POST–do not mean to spam. I don’t know why my computer submitted it twice.
@Elie:
Elle – We need to work out what I’m not being clear about. You say that it is contradictory to suggest the Normans invaded, dropped a noble class over the top of England, are still there today yet Norman genes are on average just about 1% in the population.
OK I think I know where you’re coming from.
The explanation is that the total number of Normans that actually came, on some estimates, is as low as 8000. But they dominated the higher classes which weren’t large. How many nobles were in England? A few thousand.
Now, the bit about the 1% is how much interbreeding has gone on between that elite and ordinary folk in England. It’s about 1%. genetically speaking. In other words, the ordinary folk of England are fairly unchanged for thousands of years. We know this directly from DNA studies.
But…where did all the accomplishments come from? What do we mean when think of England and English history? it isn’t really the lives of ordinary people. It’s the lives of the nobles and aristocracy, and the higher classes and all the great adventurers and discoverers and scientists and philosophers and generals and leaders that came out of these classes.
@Mickey Meadows:
By the way, I’m not suggesting by this that the ‘French’ are the ‘Normans’. They aren’t. The same thing happened there as in England. Northerners came down, took over, dropped a noble in on top.
Nor are saying that we’re all ‘German’. The same thing happened in Germany. And it isn’t a case of the Norwegians or some other scandanavian country represent these elites, because the same things happened there, in that, the ‘Normans, or ‘Norsemen’ or whatever you want to call them, that came from the North, were the *elites* of those countries.
How it all begins is not known,yet. It’s all too controversial to be allowed into science at all, at the moment. But there is a group of couragious theorists out there.
@Elie:
Elie – I’m not saying that everything traces back to a master race. These things are statistical…there’s lots of underlying complexity.
Also, I’m talking about the history of Europeans. Not anyone else. Ultimately human kind will need a unifying explanation that explains the European and Asian and African stories as part of a connected causality.
But right now, the context is Europe. And, implicitly, it’s Europe after the fall of Rome. So we’re talking about what happened after about 500 AD. We know that what happened was the spread of Germanic tribes throughout Europe and that this led to German states popping up all over the place.
What we also know is that there were already people living in those places, so there was settlement into the midst of those preexisting populations. And that is the context, implicitly of these discussion here. What sort of settlement took place, who by, what was the initial relatedness of the populations, what sort of intermarriage took place, and so on.
it’s not magical aryan mythology ok? It’s just making sense of what happened. And being intrepid about it. Being realistic (“race realist”)
@Jason Speaks:
The compartmentalized ship model folks, the compartmentalized ship: People of native European extraction (“Whites”) being the ship and their national, subdivisions being the compartments: along with compartments of blended categories; all working together and in defense against non-Whites.
@daniels.:
That is not to say that some interbreeding of Europeans is not fine and good, but on balance, it should not be the aim.
@daniels.:
hear hear, well said
This article and comment discussion is intensely disheartening.
If the same strain of White inter-ethnic hate and class pomposity found within White liberals is found within WN’s as well, then are prospects for racial salvation are dismal.
In 100 years from now when some Arab merchant buys the last purely-White female to be his token exotic for his harem, will our descendants still be sitting on their asses making dumb polack jokes?
Globalization is producing not a post-racial world as liberalism desires but instead is pressuring humanity to accept post-ethnic world. We either accept this reality or leave nothing resembling European civilization for our children.
@PIGS killed america: I’m Scots-Irish and while I would agree with the utter contempt and disdain that 92030 foists upon the likes of Hannity, OReilly and by association – the Kennedy clan and every other despicable race treasonous White elite who has a single drop of Irish or Scottish blood in their evil veins, I will not agree with the unfair assessment and condemnation of all Irish and Scottish descended Americans being responsible for what the jews have done to our once great and prosperous 90% plus White America.
This attitude reeks of the well known jewish tactic of sowing seeds of division and stirring up resentments and conflicts within the various ethnic groups of White Europeans, so as to manipulate them in to fighting with each other – instead of coming together as Whites and doing battle with the jews.
Sorry, Mr. or Mrs Pigstein – your devious attempt at using a pro-White website forum to spread your poison stands fully exposed.
As for the previously cited White race traitors, the day will come when each and every one of them will find themselves standing in line at the foot of a scaffold, following their trials and convictions for treason against their people.
@bluegrass:
The take away from the discussion (the best of it) is:
- We are one people now because we are not distinguished between by our enemies. We are the White people.
- Historically we are a complex story. :Part of our shared heritage is a love for, and passion for, objective truth. We want the right, to be that complex people once again.
- It’s not about polack or irish jokes. it never was. Especially not in time of war. War always brought us together as a people. Even when we were fighting ourselves.
- We’re in a war. It might not be same sort of war. But the stakes are even higher than any war we’ve ever been in.
- For that war, we have to completely be one people. From West Russia to Ireland, from the far north to the tip of Gibralta.
@Elie: Perhaps Elie would better be able to make her point if she referred to ‘vulture capitalism’, instead of merely capitalism in a general sense.
Capitalism has been practiced in the past whereby there was a racial realism component and racial loyalty aspect within it that helped to restrain some or most of the out-of-control, race treasonous elements that turned it into vulture capitalism.
For proof, merely read The International jew by Henry Ford, Sr. He was warning his fellow Americans as early as the 1920s what would happen to America and to his fellow White brothers and sisters if these vulturous, avaricious, greedy, disloyal, hate filled internationalist and globalist minded jews and their white gentile collaborators were allowed to seize dominant control of American industry and our government.
@Elie: Ah, but with jews – the hijacking of the genes of the dominant racial group is part of their strategy to blend in, to basically become chameleons whereby it becomes easier for them to subvert and undermine and then eventually destroy the host society. Never will you find a jew that has White genes mixed with his or her jewish DNA who can be legitimately trusted to take the side of Whites in any ethnic conflict that pits jewish interests against the interests of White Europeans.
Look at who the Founders of the the US actually were. Stop inserting wild fantasies about their origins. Fantasies about horned Scandinavians, Bog Irish and Merchants from Venice do not comport with the facts. With one or two exceptions the leaders of the Independence movement were quite ordinary British. Mainly Anglo stock. A Frenchman and a Prussian being two notable exceptions.
What is this carping about Irish in Australia as well? At that time the Irush were just another subset of British. Happy enough to take the kings shilling to kill darkies, or become enobled by HM’s and join the establishment to oppress darkies.
@Dan: Don’t expose your ignorance to the thread. The Irish are not a subset of the British. Northern Irish are (that is, those planted there by the British), not the Irish.
At the time they were so unhappy about the British being in Ireland they rebelled in The Uprising of 1798, aka the Irish Rebellion of 1798.
Many of the losing side were sent to Australia as convicts as a result, my paternal ancestor being one of them. He worked on the chain gang that built what is today the Great Western Highway and received his ticket of leave in 1822. Thereafter he settled, like many former Irish (not British) convicts in New South Wales, forming the vast Irish communities that still exist here and throughout Oz.
Many of the so-called Anglos in this thread, and other threads, would do well to learn a lesson from the Society of United Irishmen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Rebellion_of_1798#Society_of_United_Irishmen):
The prospect of reform inspired a small group of Protestant liberals in Belfast to found the Society of United Irishmen in 1791. The organisation crossed the religious divide with a membership comprising Roman Catholics, Presbyterians, Methodists, other Protestant “dissenters” groups, and some from the Protestant Ascendancy.
Btw, Britain is an amalgamation of the Scots, Welsh and English. Go check the British flag someday and learn something.
Note, Fraser describes himself as a “natural-born British subject”. Yet, Fraser himself is not an Anglo-Saxon, if we are to judge by his surname, which is “This ancient Scottish clan surname, is widely recorded in the spellings of Fraser, Frazer and Frazier, the latter being an American spelling. Curiously, although always associated with Tweedale, its exact origins remain undetermined. The earliest recorded spelling forms include de Fresel, de Friselle and de Freseliere, indicating a possible French locational origin…
(http://www.surnamedb.com/Surname/Fraser)
Oddly enough, Fraser prefers to be called a WASP than by his correct ethnic designation of Scots. Further, British is not synonymous with English, let alone Anglo-Saxon.
Time to get on board the unifying term White, I would suggest.
@Dan: Don’t expose your ignorance to the thread. The Irish are not a subset of the British. Northern Irish are (that is, those planted there by the British), not the Irish.
At the time they were so unhappy about the British being in Ireland they rebelled in The Uprising of 1798, aka the Irish Rebellion of 1798.
Many of the losing side were sent to Australia as convicts as a result, my paternal ancestor being one of them. He worked on the chain gang that built what is today the Great Western Highway and received his ticket of leave in 1822. Thereafter he settled, like many former Irish (not British) convicts in New South Wales, forming the vast Irish communities that still exist here and throughout Oz.
Many of the so-called Anglos in this thread, and other threads, would do well to learn a lesson from the Society of United Irishmen (gify wikipedia):
The prospect of reform inspired a small group of Protestant liberals in Belfast to found the Society of United Irishmen in 1791. The organisation crossed the religious divide with a membership comprising Roman Catholics, Presbyterians, Methodists, other Protestant “dissenters” groups, and some from the Protestant Ascendancy.
Btw, Britain is an amalgamation of the Scots, Welsh and English. Go check the British flag someday and learn something.
Note, Fraser describes himself as a “natural-born British subject”. Yet, Fraser himself is not an Anglo-Saxon, if we are to judge by his surname, which is “This ancient Scottish clan surname, is widely recorded in the spellings of Fraser, Frazer and Frazier, the latter being an American spelling. Curiously, although always associated with Tweedale, its exact origins remain undetermined. The earliest recorded spelling forms include de Fresel, de Friselle and de Freseliere, indicating a possible French locational origin…
(http://www.surnamedb.com/Surname/Fraser)
Oddly enough, Fraser prefers to be called a WASP than by his correct ethnic designation of Scots. Further, British is not synonymous with English, let alone Anglo-Saxon.
Time to get on board the unifying term White, I would suggest.
Actually, come to think of it, Andrew Fraser isn’t a WASP, he’s a WP: White Protestant.
@Mickey Meadows:
Sorry, I really don’t know anything about pre-Seventeenth Century Europe.
It is just way too complicated for me to find the time to read about.
But I was still just trying to point out the inconsistencies in what you were saying.
I think that these kinds of discussions lead to thinking about races as being relative to only ONE starting point in time (e.g., the Norman invasion) and then deriving all other races from that.
I just don’t think that is really the only major factor in European biology.
Why must the Nordics be the peak always? I mean, maybe they are. But can’t other isolated populations change from eugenics, cultural controls, and mutations?
Can’t there be some traits in other groups that Nordics lack?
This is why the Nordic theory seems more like mythology.
I want to see solid evidence and solid studies.
Sorry about my Anglo-Saxon rants.
I didn’t mean to offend any of you Anglos.
I just really felt like letting my thoughts loose about their role in the New World Order–not only because of their invention of internationalism and alliance with the Jewish nobility, but also because they fought on the wrong side in World War II and Bolshevised all of Eastern Europe and parts of Central Europe.
You ought to consider it. Because it really is true that Jews don’t just love us because they can fit in, but because they love our system. Other peoples don’t have that problem.
Also, most of Europe wouldn’t be under the spell of Democracy if it weren’t for the west bombing them into submission just like they are doing to the Arabs today.
@Elie:
That’s fine Ellie. But let’s leave this on a clear footing. Forget the word ‘Nordic’..the important thing that I was saying is that actually England is not more ‘nordic’ than Poland or Russia. All of Europe had the same extended aristocracy and higher castes. They constantly intermarried between themselves rather than with the indigenous of each country.
Those elites…call them what you want…..explicitly associated themselves with ‘nordic’ features. Eugenics policies across the Western world, in the 20th century, were explicitly biased toward ‘nordic’ features. That is…people being physically typed and graded.
@Mickey Meadows:
Here, pictures of polish 19th century nobility
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=polish+19th+century+aristocracy&hl=en&prmd=imvns&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=3TpsUIumNMi-0QXO54C4Dg&sqi=2&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1366&bih=648
Russian:
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=polish+19th+century+aristocracy&hl=en&prmd=imvns&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=3TpsUIumNMi-0QXO54C4Dg&sqi=2&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1366&bih=648#hl=en&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=Russian+19th+century+aristocracy&oq=Russian+19th+century+aristocracy&gs_l=img.3…45171.46534.0.46685.8.6.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0…0.0…1c.1.ukm3bcC-Hxc&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=edfa76639118433f&biw=1366&bih=648
Lithuanian
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=polish+19th+century+aristocracy&hl=en&prmd=imvns&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=3TpsUIumNMi-0QXO54C4Dg&sqi=2&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1366&bih=648#hl=en&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=Lithuanian+19th+century+aristocracy&oq=Lithuanian+19th+century+aristocracy&gs_l=img.3…19235.22728.2.23078.14.13.0.0.0.3.511.2979.4j3j1j3j1j1.13.0…0.0…1c.1.X0Ptm3LuoMw&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=edfa76639118433f&biw=1366&bih=648
Irish
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=polish+19th+century+aristocracy&hl=en&prmd=imvns&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=3TpsUIumNMi-0QXO54C4Dg&sqi=2&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1366&bih=648#hl=en&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=Irish+19th+century+aristocracy&oq=Irish+19th+century+aristocracy&gs_l=img.3…29074.29936.4.31610.5.5.0.0.0.0.1009.3953.6-2j2.4.0…0.0…1c.1.QRmdAx5Nzvs&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=edfa76639118433f&biw=1366&bih=648
@Mickey Meadows:
It would seem that your position is supported by the fact that Norman names are still more numerous among the elite in Britain today.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/8424904/People-with-Norman-names-wealthier-than-other-Britons.html
Fraser points out a needed and necessary corrective to our eventual Genocide- and yes, I use that word clearly, plainly.
Whites- English-speaking Whites of Anglo-Saxon background, are being genocided. From Bill Clinton’s speech to Ignatiev and Sonntag’s Jewish cry for a Holocaust against Whites, our race needs to see where we have erred, and take the necessary actions to regain our hegemony. It’s that simple. The solution to that Weltanschauung, unfortunately, is 1000 years overdue.
If that makes me a racist, so be it. Meh. I don’t care anymore, after four years of Obummer. If Eric ‘my people’ Holder is not called a racist (because ‘he be black’) and I am (because I’s a ‘honky’) it only goes to show that ‘some pigs are more equal than others,’ after all.
What is lacking in our analysis of the question Dr. Fraser posits, is that we need to throw off the falsity of ‘Evangelical egalitarianism,’ as has been noted over at Occidental Dissent, recently. http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2012/10/03/andrew-fraser-on-white-identity/
I myself have traced this politico-spiritual heresy to the rise of filioquism, Humbert’s actions in 1054 at Hagia Sophia (now under Hagarene rule) and the fallacious Universal Claims of Jurisdiction of the entire world (the forerunner of Sailer’s “Invite the world, invade the world”?) of the post-schism (and therefore fully self-actualized filioquist) Medieval Papacy, given thorough analysis by Brett Whalen’s “Dominion of God.”
That is why so much of the modern West’s ‘solutions’ fail time and time again. If, as Dr. Farrell has noted: “The filioque is the outward and visible sign of an inward and metaphysical depravity,” it’s certainly a truism, that “You can’t fix that which is broken, when you are broken, yourself.”
Interestingly enough, Fraser’s own ‘The WASP Question’ touched on why Orthodox Anglia prior to the Papal invasion by the Normans in 1066, was DIFFERENT. His book is what made me ‘connect the dots,’ when reading a Westerner (a WASP’s?) insights into pre-Norman England. That civilization was different because, philosophically, England was Orthodox! Thus it is, that modern writers (even Fraser, it would seem) can’t see ‘the forest for the trees’ in this arena, because they can’t see the world through ‘right-believing’ glasses. Westerners are like Alice through the Looking-glass. Our entire world is bass ackwards, and we’ve forgotten that it is!
This has led me to understand my own future as a Christian, a cleric, and an Englishman (even though I am an American citizen). When asked what I am, I proudly say, I am a WASP- but therein lies the difference. For I am a ‘true WASP: a White, Anglo-Saxon, PRAVOSLAVNIYE. © [All rights reserved.]
I am a forthright White racial advocate. I am a forthright believer in the inherent nobility of the Anglo-Saxon race. I believe in my own culture, music, art, and architecture, enlivened, and given grace by the belief of the Church of the first thousand years of Christendom. And I am a firm believer in my own, indigenous English Orthodoxy, that is fully the equal of Byzantium, and not her subject. What is more, I believe that this alone is the antidote to our apostate age, our “jewish” problem, and our cultural bastardization.
That also means that I, and all like me, (duh!) implicitly deny Rome’s validity, as well as the jews,’ to be the ‘People of God.’ They aren’t, and haven’t been for centuries. It has to be so. If Calvary be true (and it is) and the Schism is valid (and even a fool can read that in Runciman’s half-century old analysis of the question, that it is!) then all statecraft, finance, law, and morality based on that post- Humbertian gaffe: the Thomis, the papal supremacy, the filioquism, Henry’s suposed ‘break’ with the Church: (that isn’t one- Rev. 2:8,9]
All of it, is totally skewed in terms derived by, and proceding from (!) the filioque. And the aberrant belief that merely because Rome ‘says’ the entire hominidity of the planet is under her oversight as the [sic] ‘One, True Church,’ makes ‘all men are created equal,’ thereby, is reminiscent of Gershwin’s Porgy and Bess: “that ain’t necessarily so.”
Frankly, instead of listening to two cultural destroyers of the same cut argue over their supposed ‘differences,’ I’d rather kick both of them out, secede from the USA, and restore White Christendom under the valid Patristic Christianity of the Fathers, ‘start all over again,’ than pretend that Protestantism, or her ideological ‘mother’ had any validity, to determine the genocide of MY race, TYVM!
Re: Elie
(1) “Internationalism” was pioneered by the Dutch, not the English, who displaced the Dutch after the Anglo-Dutch Wars of the mid-17th century.
(2) “Capitalism” was pioneered by Germans and Italians in the Late Middle Ages and was perfected by the Dutch when Amsterdam was the center of world commerce.
(3) Oliver Cromwell let the Jews back into England in the mid-17th century. They had been expelled from England by Longshanks in 1290.
(4) After their expulsion from Spain (where Jews had thrived for centuries), they went to Holland where they flourished under Dutch protection.
(5) Emancipated Jews flourished in Germany under the Second Reich and Weimar Republic – by the 1930s, their grip on Germany was as strong as contemporary America.
(6) Speaking of communism, it was pioneered by Marx and Engels, neither of whom were English. Marx himself had been heavily influenced by Hegel and other continental European thinkers.
(7) Germany was the fortress of communism in the early twentieth century and was just as popular as Nazism in Germany when Hitler came to power. The populariry of communism is why the German communists threw in their lot with Hitler.
(8) Did Britain make a mistake in siding with Poland in WW2?
Obviously, the cause of that though was the influence of evangelical Christianity and liberalism in Britain. It was a cultural problem, not an ethnic one.
hahaha- @ Elie— “wasps destroyed America… because they invited non-wasps whites.”
That says it all. She’s blaming them for their “self-destruction,” but this involves them TRYING to bring some of the other white europeans with them.
Fraser is BRILLIANT when he says that wasps are the scapegoats of Europe. The Portuguese ran the entire transatlantic slave trade, but they are not attacked and can be 94% ethnic portuguese, lol.
A fundamental problem with “white” nationalism is that only the wasps seem capable of “taking in their sins” and the others heap on blame (without ever being able to admit it). Many of the white catholics can only blame jews, or turn around and blame protestantism (even “thee” church, as if there is only one, which is such a joke, still teaches the moral highroad of white genocide in europe, and don’t point out that their genocides ARE WHY the u.s. had “separation of church and state” and so on). Much of the u.s. founding was a DEFENSE against what has since some to its shores.
The second the Irish arrived (fed a steady diet of Hollywood pro-irish/ anti-english-german movies and the Bull Conner hose shots intercut with “irish need not apply” signs)—- they set about opening the border. Their Supreme court keeps it open. Philip Hart was an irish catholic banker, the Kennedys got involved in Cuba not he catholic basis, etc.
Brudda says:
Anglos are a valuable niche but not much can be gained by clinging to such a small chunk of the pie. In an era where overall White numbers are dwindling, it seems foolish to focus on an even smaller sect within the greater minority….”
Brudda, why are you pro-white Genocide? Wasps are WHITE. To call them just a “small chunk” not worth “hanging onto” is to be in the direction of being for white genocide.
The reason they are mentioned is that OTHER WHITES (Traitors) have tried to make them the scapegoats of all Europe. For instance, Portuguese really ran the transatlantic slave trade, but catholics in media blame only Northern European white protestants in the American south, over and over and over.
So that is Genocidal behavior.
You seem very in favor of such Genocidal behavior. Making Anti-White movies about a sub-group of Whites (wasps)— such as so much of Hollywood, is to be pro genocide of wasps.
Why are you pro genocide?
and @ Greg “…But my ancestors did not do that. Money, religion, tolerance, and ideology were more important to WASPs than racial, ethnic, and religious homogeneity. So they opened the country up to progressively more heterogeneous immigrant populations…”
That’s just not true. Or…in a sense it is. They opened the gate AT FIRST. When it was clear they had gone too far —and that some of the people LOOKED LIKE THEM BUT HAD NO LOYALTY to them— they did try to shut the gate. (The struggle of this is deep-sixed, of course).
Who are the Irish really “loyal” to? They hated the queen, (with cause, at least apparently). But were they better off rolling over for Rome? Did that make them more Irish? And having forgotten their true roots, and having searched farther afield for who they are— did it help them, in the long run? Will their children by HAPPIER in the u.s. now, that their own families “opened the gate” to admit more indigenous south americans?
How long does Hannity or O’Reilly expect to be invited places where anglo-saxons still are? How long do groups who show no care for the children of the founders expect there will be no backlash (however silent, as it must be). Right?
Just because you didn’t see wasps fight— doesn’t mean they have not. The “victors” (if you can call them that) “write history.”
Yup, the PIGS killed 700,000 WASPs alone between 1861-1865….
and this does not even mention the catholic genocide of Europe (the only reason the lower half professes that doctrine). Millions burned at the stake.
Greg says:
“…So there is something anachronistic about an insistence on WASP nationalism as opposed to White Nationalism, since WASPs are a disappearing ethnic group …”
YOU WISH. Why are you soooo pro-white Genocide?
And Mr. Belinsky—- please quit arguing from t.v. propaganda, lol (“The Deer Hunter features a Carpatho-Rus family (i.e., “Slovaks” of a sort) that bears all the costs of lower-middle class patriotism…”
Poor you, you, you. Maybe you should have a pity party with Bull Conner hose scenes.
ELIE—- lol @ “…Why do you even care anymore if someone comes from a Protestant background or a Catholic background?….”
Mostly because White Catholics opened the border to populations that northern european protestants do not wish to live with. They ALSO voted in a ghetto welfare-warfare statist situation— union hegemony, “left v right” marriage of european fascism (militarist-corporatist-medicalism) and communism (which think-tanked the socialization systems.
Wasps —you were right— DID THINK they could bring in some europeans in the past. You bitch about having “worked in a factory” (the worst thing that could have happened to you, one supposed, God forbid)—- but you think EUROPE was treating you any damn better? LOL! Serfs were all europe was.
You act like you were queen of the realm—then put out to factory work in the u.s., lol. Read the history of working europeans for God’s sake. The european serfs— got a slightly better deal for a long time in the u.s. factories. (Until their unionizing made anyone else better to work with— crap demands over minutiae, wages unthinkable back in the europe of dickens.
And none gave the wasps who had broken their backs in a hostile land—even the time of day— just all their bitching, all their complaints!
@dixie:
700,000 WASPS were killed by PIGS between 1861 and 1865 but irony still lives!
Is Kevin sure about blacks having lower IQ than whites?
@Vissarion Belinsky: Novak was a Jew who converted to Catholicism.
@Elie:
“But of course there is no inherent flaw in the Anglo system that made it a philo-Semitic magnet and accelerated its decline into multiculturalism. ”
I know you are being sarcastic, but I would say the inherent flaw in the Anglo system that made it a philo-Semitic magnet and accelerated its decline into multiculturalism was/is/always will be the British Israelite Movement.
Many Britons will deny that they are Europeans even though I have pointed out that this is like Cape Cod saying it’s not part of Massachusetts.
But that weird notion comes from this deep-seated and erroneous belief that they are Israelites, i.e. Semites, so why wouldn’t they be more Philosemitic than Japhethite Europe as a whole?
The more I watch the wild pendulum ride White European people take veering wildly from Antisemitism to Philosemitism and back again, the more I am convinced of the importance of educating them in their true Japhethite identity. The only way to overcome the Jew is not through Antisemitsm, but Asemitism. Where we make every consideration on how or if it benefits Japhethites.
Tom, the matter of whether a Japhethite is Protestant, Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Pagan or even Atheist is window dressing. We are all Japhethites and it is time we stop fighting each other over very minor ideological differences.
Someone above mentioned “COAL MINES” (and how non-wasps, seemingly alone, worked in them).
If you look at a map of the U.S., you’ll see that ALL the coal mines are in the most wasp-populated areas. Eg: West Virginia, a coal state, almost categorically scotch-irish, and an early part of the frontier (many pre-american-revolutionary families there).
MANY wasps worked in coal mines in the u.s., and still do (they are the TARGET of “clean energy” —i.e. Genocide
I SECOND GREG JOHNSON REGARDING MR. FRAZIER AND THE ANGLO -SAXON QUESTION. AND BY THE WAY HOW ANGLO SAXON IS MR. FRAZIER AS MR HANNIGAN POINTED OUT- ISN’T FRAZIER A SCOTTISH NAME?
@Pierre de Craon:
Are you still posting here? How do you cope? This blog goes from bad to worse. The good professor’s synthesis of lapsed Catholicism, junk science and American liberalism is a joke. Our Jewish friends must be in hysterics especially when the KKK come on line.
@Clytemnestra:
It is praisworthy that you propose “a-Semitism” instead of pro- or anti-Semitism, but you still seem to think inside the Jewish box with your belief that Europeans are “Japhethites”, indicating that you take the silly story of Noah and the ark and his three sons Ham, Sem and Japheth seriously.
Knowledge about the origin of races and peoples cannot be found in superstitious religious texts but in science, and really the world is much older than the 6500 years the Bible ascribes to it, while the various races cannot be the descendants of a single man who lived no more than 4400 years ago.
Ergo : Europeans are not “Japhethites”.
From the section on Puritans in SAID
East Anglia being the most heavily colonized by ‘Anglo Saxons’(ie Danes) that is some to think that the Puritans were more Anglo Saxon that the rest of the English, but they had other special characteristics.
So the founding stock WASPs/Puritans were a particular ethnic blend of ‘English’. An aspect that I think is being overlooked is the extent to which their character was the product of gene-culture coevolution through market orientated occupations.
The differences between the early Irish immigrants and the Puritan descended WASPs weren’t just religion and ethnicity. The Puritans started as a collection of overwhelmingly middle class people. WASP failure to defend their ethnic interests may be down to the Anglo Saxons hunter gatherer background ( as Kevin MacDonald says), but the 10,000 years of civilization since is also part of the explaination. And the WASPs were changed more than others, because they were at the forefront of gene culture coevolution.
As Gregory Clark says, in a free market led society people prosper by settling disputes; the environment rewards middle-class values of patience, diligence, acquisitiveness and self-control. The WASPs are ‘nordics’ and protestants, but the key category that the white elite fall into now (as William Pierce said) is ‘Economic man’.
Instead, he reduces America’s founding race to the lowest common denominator of Whiteness allegedly shared with sundry ethno-religious groups as disparate as Germans, Italians, Lebanese, Armenians, and Jews.
——————////———————
America referring to the USA ?
South Americans are rightly angered to hear the USA being accepted as “America” .
America’s founding race were those native Indians who were slaughtered in genocidal purges by “white” Christian Europeans who stole & occupied a land that was already inhabited (by the Native Americans) -
@Neville:
Nonsense. The Savage Indian Tribes were in no way “Americans.” You may call them “Turtle Islanders” if you wish, but the term “American” is European.
At least in North America, the Savage Indian Tribes did not “found” much of anything aside from stone age villages. Nor were they the original inhabitants of this continent, but interlopers who massacred and often ATE the people that were here before them. Nor did they ever inhabit much of the continent aside from scattered patches. Nor were they one people or one civilization.
Your revisionist history and feigned concern for the Savage Indian Tribes is merely a cover for your anti-White and anti-American hate.
@Neville:
“America” (as opposed to “the Americas”) is shorthand for “The United States of America”– and, to the best of my knowledge, without taking further time, here and now, to double-check my recollection, it is the only nation in the Americas that has “America” as a part of its formal name!?! Thus, a reference to simply “America” is a reference solely to us, in the U.S., not to Canada nor any Latin-American nation.
As for the Indians, they came to the so-called New World, from Asia, in waves. They were apparently not the first to arrive here, however; Europeans were. Whether those first Europeans in America died out of their own accord, or were given a push from some later arrivals, I am sure that I could not say…. What I can say, however, is that most of the so-called indigenous Americans (humans, of course, were not indigenous to the Americas; they all merely migrated here, in waves, which are sadly still ongoing…) died from diseases for which they had no natural immunities. That was an inevitable eventually, since the Age of Discovery was inevitable in preceding the age of modern medicine. C’est la vie! If the (later) European migrants, especially the non-Iberians who settled America and Canada, had been intent on the genocide of the red man, there would be no red men left– let alone living, here in the United States, on the public dole!
@Neville:
Oh yes, the endless guilt trip against European ethnic people. And a remark like Neville’s, in and of itself, is coming from bigotry and hatred, against the only ethnic group that it is always politically correct to hate on. And that is what such remarks are: the ethnic hatred that the poster claims to be protesting against.
It is hard to even imagine trying to lay such blanket blame on Arabs, Black Africans, indigenous American natives — all of whom have their own histories — it would be like water on a duck’s back. And try to pull this on Jewish past actions (such involvement in the Holodomor etc.) — you’ll probably get to witness the masters of guilt kung fu in action.
@ frank edward stone:
You mean Michael Novak is a fake shiksa, like our trollish commentatrix Dixie? Wow.
Seriously, though, you were thinking of Robert Novak, not Michael.
Is Dixie a fraud? It would make sense. Good spot.
White nationalism won’t work if we draw lines of demarcation between Protestants/Catholics, believers/agnostics, and North/South. Of course our enemies know this, which is why the usual suspects are posting en masse to this thread.
Europe has similar problems – Croat/Serb, German/Slav, English/Irish, etc… Tom Sunic discusses this at length in his essays.
But I remain an optimist. I think deep down the majority of whites loathe the prospect of our race going the way of the Sioux. In the end I believe we’ll put aside our petty differences to carve out a future for our people.
Just because not all of us are enthralled with your pope-and-priests in drag doesn’t mean we’re “frauds” or “trollish.”
Guess what? Not everyone here is a Catholic. Some of us have good reason for resenting your foreign, Middle Eastern, non-White cult’s presence in America. In the modern era it was clearly Catholics who held hands with the Jews (as they have so often done) to open the borders to massive non-White immigration – and continues to do so, attempting to flood America with the masses of brown Latino Catholics.
Dr. Johnson writes: “WASP nationalism is anachronistic, petty, and divisive. It is an impediment rather than an aid in the survival of our race on this continent.”
I couldn’t agree more.
White ethnic identity does nothing for our cause. Two hundred years ago maybe but not today. There is strength in numbers. We need all white people engaged in our struggle not simply Anglo Saxons. Just reality.
In every battle of Empire you would find Irish Catholics in substantial numbers in the ranks. Huge numbers of Irish Catholic administrators too.
I know my own grandad was a Connaught Ranger. He got mixed up with the Dwvil’s Own mutiny in India at the time of Irish independence.
I know both sides of the fighting, both English and Irish from the inside out.
Off topic, I found this [here in another thread] and find it to be ‘genius’, or ‘how things have changed’:
They aren’t like immigrants today who,
fresh off the boat from the Punjab
get handed a small business loan
and then send their kids to med school!
@buckle: Seriously, it’s probably just a phase.
I was happier in the old-format days, when comments were permitted only on blog entries. Ultimately, of course, I say nothing that is worth attending to (not that my foes do any better), certainly not in comparison with some of the best articles here over the years, many of them KM’s. Still, the recent exercises in Tribalism for Fun and Profit, moving precipitately as they have from a giggle to a yawn to a more than slightly scary fête des fous, make your implicit sternness with me not at all malapropos.
But to the heart of the matter. Though I certainly think macroevolution is a fantasy or, worse, a joke in poor taste, I think you’re overtough on our host. Before he theorizes, he looks at the facts and he does his sums. That’s all we can reasonably ask of scientists—and how many who now claim to be scientists are nothing more than liars or fantasists (the latter term being what liars’ loved ones call liars)? And whatever the state of his own relations (or the absence thereof) with our Faith, it was he (via his trilogy) who made me realize that the conciliar catholic authors I’d read for thirty years, men who told me that John Chrysostom was an anti-Semitic bigot who didn’t deserve a place in the canon of the saints, were themselves the true liars and bigots, lying as they constantly did to conceal or whitewash the crimes of the Jews and bigoted as they were against the believers whose Faith they falsely claimed to share as they subverted it.
In short, though others tried leading me to the well, KM alone persuaded me to drink. I shall be forever grateful to him for that. Still, perhaps it’s time to leave this classroom, too, and apply the lessons learned here in an attempt to better our fast-decaying society in the little time remaining to me.
Clearly, and the dinosaurs went extinct because they wouldn’t fit on Noah’s Ark.
No doubt.
@Pierre de Craon:
Yes all of us have had to endure the post-Conciliar model. Poor KM had clearly had enough himself and decided to leave and I can understand.
It’s so confusing and painful on here as the frauds and the KKK vie with one as to which can sow the most disunity. Alasdair Macintyre is right when he highlights the lack of a common protocol and interface amongst the European tribes. AM is of the view that only the Catholic faith can provide these missing mechanisms and both of us concur. The self-destruction of the Church since Vatican II has now rendered that process all the more a problem.
An American physicist once said that, “The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function”. I think he was incorrect. The greatest failing is the inability to grasp the derivative. Surely that was what Satan sold Eve and who in turn resold the package to Adam. No wonder we see Jewish involvement in the 2008 financial crisis as paradigmatic.
Evelyn Waugh’s “Helena”, as in the mother of Constantine, saw the reality of the situation as the Roman Empire was collapsing. She sort reality in the veneration of the true cross and that it was only in its pursuit could the Romans rediscover their sense of actuality. It was unusual for Waugh to be so didactic. Unless we discover some common purpose then this blog merely compounds the problem (hence the physicist’s conclusion) but it must be something real and tangible which is where Helena come in.
I think it’s a great article with a fantastic point.
Kind with kind. I am Nordic/Anglo Saxon and lo and behold…people who look like me are the people I am attracted to. Hark! I wonder why :) That’s how god intended.
I also notice a drop in families when say the pure Anglo Saxon Nordic blue eyed husband marries a white Italian with dark hair dark eyes. The children are never as successful as the father.
@Pierre de Craon: I profess no expertise on the matter of macro-evolution, do you have any reading recommendations on the subject? (The natural sciences don’t inform my ethical views, but as I’m a denizen of this site…).
@Mudur:
Well, I have never seen more words put in my mouth before.
Where do I say that Celts were Dinaric and where did you get the idea they were Nordic? Now, I am sure they had Dinaric-looking individuals among them—more so than Germanic or Baltic tribes—–but, yes, I reckon they were predominantly Alpine and/or Atlantid with respect to cranial and musculoskeletal elements of their phenotype. As far as pigmentation goes, they were probably brown haired, on average, with medium eye color.
“Anyobody who travels…..knows well that very few Italians can pass for Irish and vise versa”. Apparently, you haven’t traveled so much or you probably mistook some Neapolitans you saw in Milan, Rome, or Turin(those cities are mainly inhabited by Neapolitans and non-white immigrants by now) for genuine Lombards, Piedmontese or Latins.
You must live in Jersey or Conn. First off, the Irish are more Central European if we look at their phenotype distribution than they are Nordic. Secondly, no kidding, the average Central or Northern Italian will be more pigmented than your average Irishman, but as far as pigmentation goes, there is still significant overlap. How about the Tuscan butcher Dario Cecchini? How about the Romagnol actor Gabrio Gentillini? These types occur with regular frequency in their respective regions.
TINY Gallic substratum? TINY? Now, there is, in fact, a tiny Germanic substratum across the entire peninsula but Gallic blood runs deep in some regions of the Po Valley and the locals are well aware of that. Even though the Lega Nord is not popular with the Romagnoli(one of the most influential yet unrecognized people in S. Europe), they strongly identify with Gallic heritage. Quite a musically expressive people they are, like the ancient Galli themselves; Gioacchino Rossini, Raoul Casadei and Laura Pausini may ring some bells.
It is true that certain modern European groups have a sizeable portion of ancestors who did not speak an Indo-European language: Gascons and possibly some Catalans with Baskid descent, various Italian parts with Ligurian and Etruscan descent, etc. But what makes you think these non Indo-European speaking tribes were swarthy and SEMITIC? According to your logic, Ligurians and Provencals should look mostly like Tony Shaloub, or varioations of him, at least. There is only one problem: they don’t.
As for me, I am not affiliated in any way with the Lega Nord. It’s mostly popular with Venets as well as Bergamascs and Bresans(Venet territories of old). They may have some avant-garde ideas, but, overall, they have a point and do show balls where necessary—read about Giancarlo Gentilini aka sheriff of Treviso. This makes them stand out from most other separatist groups on the continent who tend to exhibit left-wing nationalism. Lega Nord is the closest thing to a mainstream party that openly and unabashedly takes the side of the Occidental citizen and the most powerful of its kind.
Last but not least, R1B/A and haplotype I2, for that matter, mean different things in different context—again, no kidding there. But isn’t it a little strange that these are the dominant haplotypes in the heart of Europe and that their frequencies, although slowly decreasing in a gradient-like fashion, fall drastically when you get to the “tips” facing the Near East, like Bulgaria, Thessaly, Calabria, and the Algarve? Or that populations of Europe with these drastically reduced frequencies, in MOST(but not all!) cases, play the dominant role in the foundation of our Occidental civilization?
We have the Croats and we have the Bulgarians. We have the Catalans and we have the Cordobans and Sevillans. We have the Romagnoli and we have the Pugliese. See the contrasting pattern I am trying to illustrate in these exemplary pairs?
It is also interesting to note that the former element of each pair is recognizably, inherently, and consciously Occidental as Germans or English or French despite a slight tan and slightly convex noses in some cases. No more and no less.
@buckle
Thanks for that response to Craon; I finally understand what’s going on with the Catholic obscurantists here.
Your mistake was to point to something concrete; exponential functions and derivatives, and the inability of most people to intuitively understand them. You make a quite charming reference to the story of Adam and Eve, riffing on the current economic crisis caused by the financial derivative collapse, and hinting at the Jewish malfeasance involved. Of course, the story of Adam and Eve is infintely malleable, and can be used as an analogy for just about anything. So no actual information is being shared, just a throw-away metaphor, intended to obscure, not illuminate.
You compound (no pun intended) the problem with reference to the “true cross.” Of course, the “true cross” originally were actual pieces of wood supposedly from the physical execution device of Jesus Christ, long sold to superstitious peasants as magical talismans. But since no one believes in this anymore – just like no one believes in a literal Adam, Eve, and Serpent – you analogize it; “true cross” is now simply a symbol for Western unity under Catholicism. One is reminded of nothing so much as the infamous quip “Blessed are the Cheesemakers? It’s not meant to be taken literally, he obviously means all manufacturers of dairy products.”
What we’re seeing here is the Catholic version of post-modernism. As Alan Sokal said:
Substitute “spiritual” for “discource and ‘text’” and he could be describing the Catholic theologians and their mixing and matching metaphors, obscure literary and theological references, and purposefully dense language. Unlike Sokal’s description of the post-modernists as displaying a “false eridution” (becuase some clearly had no comprehension of the scientific texts they were riffing off of) I have no doubt if one were to spend their career reading obscure medieval manuscripts about the “true cross” and such, you would find the Catholics do understand their source material, because it’s all literary, “spiritual” and poetry anyway.
Like the “hipster” of the current age, the Catholic obscurantists are telling us “you don’t understand because you haven’t read this great theological text from 1434.” And they would be right. And it would still be just as irrelevant as some obscure pop band that no one but the hipsters ever listened to anyway.
They cannot make any reasonable case that the actual, existing institution of the Vatican and the Catholic Church – much less Catholicism as a religion/ideology – can in any way promote Western unity, but they can befuddle – and bore – the lowly “KKKs” with flowery language and obscure references.
Like Quentin Tarantino films, you know it’s full of inside jokes about obscure cult films – but would it do anyone any good to actually spend time watching the B-grade movies he references, considering they were, in fact, considered b-grade for a reason?
MacDonald, after reading someone make some sort of creationist anti-Darwin post here, in obvious exasperation complained that if we can’t agree on the basics of evolutionary science, he wasn’t sure what we could agree on, and bitterly complained that it was like “herding cats.” Yet here we have a religious Catholic describing macroevolution, a fundamental theory in the biological sciences, as a “fantasy” and a “joke,” yet (supposedly) takes very seriously notions of gods, devils, the “true cross” and other patent superstition.
The difference between this crowd and hick Protestant Bible-thumpers (buckle’s “KKK”) is that these people are clearly intelligent enough to know they are peddling bullshyte. Thus we are not dealing with ignorance, but purposeful deception.
Thus buckle’s complaint about “frauds” is a perhaps unwitting confession. Which is fine, I’ve always been told that “confession is good for the soul.”
@Richard Pierce: Mental masturbation and boldface type were never substitutes for thought, Pierce/Pierson. Nor have you turned that alchemical trick here either.
@Pierre de Craon:
Absent the flowery language and obscure insider references, you have personal insults, Craon, and that’s really all you have, for those of us who simply don’t care about your Catholicism. Or your (literal) belief in Noah’s Ark?
One is reminded of Chomsky’s description of Lacan, “an amusing and perfectly self-conscious charlatan.”
@Trenchant: Phillip Johnson’s Darwin on Trial was my introduction to the subject, but the real Darwinian dealbreaker for me was Michael Behe’s Darwin’s Black Box. I also recommend The Edge of Evolution.
I’ve seen William Dembski on C-SPAN—that was many years ago, of course; the network no longer ventures far off the beaten path (i.e., post-9/11, anent which it first did great work in giving Griffin, Reynolds, and other Truthers a podium)—but I’ve not read any of his books. He’s a formidable speaker, but as with all mathematicians, generating podium electricity is not his strongest suit. I’ve also seen David Berlinski on C-SPAN, but given his Jewishness, rightly or wrongly I simply don’t trust his advocacy of the anti-Darwinian model.
I recall seeing many ID and ID-influenced pieces on LRC in years past, but I can’t call any to mind offhand.
I ought to note in closing that even in college, I was shaken when I learned that, virtually to a man, the fossil experts of Darwin’s day thought his macro theory was baseless. The near-universal assumption that they were all deluded never sat well with me. To give ordnance to Pierce/Pierson and all other sneerers I should add, too, that the contrast between the widespread skepticism re Darwinism pre-Vatican II among Catholic scientists and their postconciliar embrace of the dogma also didn’t sit well once I began to understand the Judaeomasonic roots of the council.
@buckle: You cite a great book. Helena’s prayer to the Magi has been a prayer of mine own, too, since my Vietnam days. I was vain enough then to hope that its reference to them as “patrons of all latecomers, of all who have a tedious journey to make to the truth, of all who are confused with knowledge and speculation, of all who through their politeness make themselves partners in guilt, of all who stand in danger by reason of their talents” might one day include me as one of their number, as one of “the learned, the oblique, the delicate” whom she prayed would “not be quite forgotten at the Throne of God when the simple come into their kingdom.”
I haven’t quite got there yet.
@Richard Pierce: You are right up to a point. Unlike the other meatheads hereabouts, you can construct a compound-complex sentence with more or less standard orthography and grammar. But as with those others, the matter you trade in is hatred and calumny, material in response to which insults are often far more germane than reasoned responses to unreason.
@Pierre de Craon:
Just so we know what we’re dealing with here, Craon, do you believe in a literal Noah’s Ark, as in an actual boat, with two of every kind of animal, 7 of the kosher ones, and an actual human named Noah, and his children Ham, Shem and Japeth?
Is that why the dinosaurs went extinct, because they couldn’t fit on the ark? Do you subscribe to “young earth creationism” as well?
Pardon my ignorance, I was under the perhaps incorrect assumption that no one outside of Kansas fundamentalists and a few snake handlers in the Appalachians actually believed this stuff.
I actually have on my desk, currently, four creationist “textbooks” asserting just such things, put out by Master Books/New Leaf Publishing, that I received in a most unlikely chain of coincidences, that – who knows? – may actually have been the result of divine intervention!
It bears repeating: “an amusing and perfectly self-conscious charlatan.”
@Richard Pierce: I am not another Tyron Parsons to be goaded and baited by an equally egregious and contemptible fool like you, Pierce/Pierson. Figure out for yourself what I believe by reading, something you do a lot of, albeit in predictably wrong places. Start with the Universal Magisterium, as found in the encyclicals of the pre-Paul VI twentieth-century popes. Those of Pope Saint Pius X and Pius XII are good places to start. In fact, begin with Divino afflante spiritu since your “concern” is with the Bible.
@Andrew: You are confused a little bit.
The Angles are not Belgian, but German. In fact the first mention of the Angles was in Tacitus’s “Germania” where he lists them among the German tribes along the Baltic coast.
Their name seems to have derived from the fact that they lived in the angle formed by Jutland and the Baltic coastline.
Also, for accuracy’s sake, the third major tribe was the Jutes, a German tribe after whom the Jutland peninsula in Denmark is named.
The Danes and Norwegians (Vikings) were also Germans, the northern branch of the Germans.
@Frank Edwin Stone: Frank, I’ve been interested in the origins of all kinds of people for a long time. I studied anthropology for 3 years in college as a kind of side interest. I’ve absorbed the opinions of Americans from all over the states, and traveled to many different parts of the U.S. I reached one conclusion about many Americans attitude towards Germans, or Germanic people even in the U.S. There is a great deal of animosity, in some cases an almost vile hatred towards people of Germanic descent. It doesn’t even have to be Germans only, but Dutch, Swedes, Swiss,etc. Much of this hatred was inspired by WW11 and continues to be whipped up by an endless output of Nazi films, WW11 films, holocaust films,etc. Then there are the descendants of Americans that fought in WW11 and in some cases lost someone that fought in WW11 in Europe. The anti-German literature was very intense in publications like the Army’s Stars and Stripes. I remember one piece of advice I read in that magazine that warned Americans going over to occupy or fight in Europe, ” When you arrive in Germany, do not pat the heads of the little German blond boys and girls, for by doing so, you will be participating in “evil”.(quotes mine) It’s understandable that that generation, felt like it did and it’s only a great tribute to those that resisted this crazy brainwashing and patted the heads of the children anyway,etc. And then I found out that even many German-Americans, tried to hide their identity’s, so extreme was the propaganda against Germany, even a few years after the war. When one looks back at these things from todays perspective, it almost seems crazy. I’ve learned a great deal about the stereotyping of other Europeans also, but that’s for another time.
@Richard Pierce:
You accuse me of obscurantinism but then explain at some length exactly what I have said to Pierre. I am both flattered and confused! Why all the hatred? The mother of the Emperor of Constantine a “peasant”?
@Pierre de Craon: Thanks. Whatever the merits or demerits of Darwinism in a strictly scientific sense, I see it as barren in the moral sphere, and so devoid of rhetorical appeal.
@Bobby: The dachshund getting a war-time makeover to “liberty hound” seems almost laughable now, but then…
@Pierre de Craon:
The irony. We can figure out what Craon “believes” not by his own logical thought, but simply reading what his Vatican told him to believe.
Whether he even read it or not (and there’s no doubt that he did) it makes no difference. He didn’t look at the facts, and come to a conclusion. He simply “believes” whatever the Vatican says he should “believe.”
Which means, of course, he doesn’t really “believe” any of it. He just says he does, because otherwise, he wouldn’t be a good Catholic.
So there’s no point in even engaging him in anything; just look up x in the catalog; that’s what he will pretend to believe.
Otherwise, he burns in hell for all eternity.
Again: “an amusing and perfectly self-conscious charlatan.” There’s no doubt he’s far more intelligent than this.
Notice how the Catholics scream “hate!!!” just like the Jews do. Not really that much difference between their tortured analogies (Noah’s Ark is not “factual” but it’s still “true”) and the Jew’s “if we push the elevator button this way, it’s kosher.”
But the beauty of the poetry (and I won’t deny that) and the cleverness of the prose lets us all overlook that it doesn’t hold up under any rational analysis.
That would be “hate” after all!
What a waste of a clearly intelligent White intellect, either due to sheer posturing, or some weird emotional issue.
Who will rid us of these meddlesome priests?
@Richard Pierce:
Any day you find yourself able to practice what you preach will be a good day for anyone who isn’t a fan of village atheism, Internet-style.
@Richard Pierce:
If you are white, which I am inclined to doubt, your hatred of the religion of countless generations of your ancestors is a sad comment on the extent of Jewish success. The inability to perceive the sacred is a true disability. Your pitiful rants are the equivalent of the color-blind complaining endlessly about the shades chosen by those who have normal eyesight.
I have seen many lows on the comments section of this site, but the pitiful attempts to be the most victimized displayed in recent days is very sad indeed.
@Trenchant: Precisely! I couldn’t have said it better myself. Heaven knows I would never have said it so compendiously.
@Trenchant:
(cc: Bobby)
The dachshund was rebadged as the liberty hound? This really happened? You’re not having us on?
Wow. What else can I say but “please pass the freedom fries.”
@Pierre de Craon: The Dachshund getting named the liberty hound is hilarious. I’ve never read this, but I don’t doubt it. Was it General Patton that said “war is hell”? It isn’t just that war is hell, it also brings out the lunacy in human beings.
@Bobby: You’re right, sadly. That’s the thing about living in the Clinton-Bush-Obama-era USA: nothing is so crazy that it beggars belief any longer.
@Pierre de Craon:
Please join me in the pleasure I am taking in watching the elite media twist into knots trying to explain Obama’s poor performance in the debate with Romney. No one, absolutely no one, is remarking on the perfectly obvious explanation. As the numinous negro who is not angry, speaks standard English, and above all, is not corrupted by the legacy of slavery, he has never faced anything but glowing praise for the simplest of achievements. No one has dared challenge him on anything. He ran in the last election against a menopausal woman and an old man. He had to debate an alpha male who showed him only the deference due his office – and it stunned Obama into silence. The wind is changing.
@Alice Teller:
I am most encouraged by the fact that you think the reports of Obama’s maladroitness weren’t mere partisan overreaction. My current state of mind is such that, irrespective of the fact that he will certainly equal Obama in doing international Jewry’s bidding, I’ve become almost desperate in wanting Romney, as our bum, to crush this walking, talking affront to the white Christian population whose displacement he emblematizes for our Jewish masters.
@Pierre de Craon:
I am still in sufficient touch with reality to hold little hope for Mr. Romney as President, but he will have earned my respect simply for the courage to meet and challenge Mr. Obama as an equal. We have all been so paralyzed by PC notions of race for so long they have seriously impaired our ability to think clearly. Romney stood tall and announced that the Emperor has no clothes. It has been a real pleasure watching Obama’s drooling media fans fumble for an explanation.
@Pierre de Craon: Pierre, I also tend to believe that it started with Clinton. I don’t have any special disdain reserved for the man, most politicians in the U.S. for the last twenty years seem equally as useless as Clinton was. He was only lucky that the dot com era coincided with his presidency, and when he claimed credit for his great economy, as he did during his speech for Obama, that was the reason. It had nothing to do with him whatever. Towards the end of his second term, the economy based on dot com and the subsequent thousands of scams, started to falter, then Bush got blamed.
The reason I give Clinton credit for being the Father of “American decay”, is that this social climbing opportunist and his buffoonish wife, seem to stick out as exceptionally phony, in a D.C. overwhelmed with phonies. Clinton either started, or pushed through most of the “free trade” agreements, that Perot said would create a giant sucking sound of jobs going south,etc. Of course, the American public took Periot to heart, and until Papa Bush found something to blackmail him with, making him withdraw and re-enter when it was too late, it looked like he could actually change the status quo.
It’s been downhill, ever since Perot ran for President and lost. I completely agree with your characterization of the last twenty yearsm,Clinton-Bush-Obama.
@Tom: Tom, I live in California. From what I have seen, there are plenty of Protestants, who have businesses–whether construction, roofing, car repair, painting, or just plain businesses that need cheap janitors to clean the floors and toilet, AND ALL OF THEM HIRE TENS OF THOUSANDS, MAYBE MORE, ILLEGAL ALIENS. They can’t wait for more to arrive to exploit the cheap labor.
Here’s the crazy part Tom, and I’ve seen this over and over. Yes, it will often be Catholic charities, or some such Catholic group, that send these people to those Protestant business people/owners. They love the cheap labor, and wouldn’t in their wildest imaginations, think of hiring some Protestant white kid,etc. to do some of those jobs. And in California, there are thousands of those kind of kids looking for work. I’ve helped some, when I could, but believe me, those Christian, NON-CATHOLICS, need no encouragment in furthering illegal immigration into the U.S. from places like Mexico,etc.