Dr. Frank Salter on Germany’s Jeopardy

Kevin MacDonald

Dr. Frank Salter has produced a sober, scientifically based assessment of the likely consequences of Germany’s disastrous policy toward  migration from the Middle East and Africa. The subtitle appropriately asks, “Could the Immigrant Influx ‘End European Civilization’?” The answer, of course, is that it could and may well do so if current trends are not reversed.

Although terrorism and the recent mass sexual assaults in Germany certainly focus the public’s attention on the costs of massive unselected immigration, the far greater problem is loss of a traditional sense of national identity as bound up with a particular people and culture, “leaving citizenship a hollowed-out legalism” — what is often termed the “proposition nation” concept of citizenship dedicated only to abstract Western ideals of freedom and democracy rather than protecting the interests of a particular people. The ideology of the proposition nation is now well established among the political and intellectual elites throughout the West, its plausibility deriving from what are seen as the past disasters resulting from nationalism in Europe. Indeed, as Dr. Salter notes, atoning for National Socialism is an explicitly stated goal of Angela Merkel’s migration policy.

Advertisement - Time to SUBSCRIBE now!

The outcome of the present policies is utterly predictable decline in social cohesion, with far-ranging costs in terms of increased conflict and crime, and a lessened willingness and ability to contribute to public goods such as welfare and health care. Dr. Salter reviews data showing that ethnic diversity is correlated with a host of undesirable outcomes. People in ethnically diverse societies invest less in social capital, they cooperate less, are less prone to engage in volunteer work, and there is less trust among citizens. He reminds us that evolution occurred in ethnically homogeneous groups. The hunter-gatherer mentality that is a critical strand of European culture evolved in small, face-to-face groups where trust and reputation were absolutely critical.

But even in the larger, ethnically homogeneous societies that characterized Europe until recently, there were high levels of trust and cooperation, resulting in willingness to spend on an array of social welfare programs, such as national health insurance. While the migrants who are making Europe increasingly diverse benefit from these programs and are often dependent on them, the prediction is that such programs will be discontinued or underfunded in the future as there is less willingness to contribute to such public goods for people who are unlike self. Minimally, the White citizens — who will disproportionately be paying taxes to support these programs — will be less willing to contribute to programs that are disproportionately used by the migrants and their descendants.

Dr. Salter lists some of the consequences of conflict in Europe — ethnic segregation and no-go areas in France, the sexual exploitation scandals in the UK. Right now the massive sexual assault in Germany from very recent migrants is  making headlines — finally, after a 4-day blackout. Some stories are so big that they just can’t be suppressed by what the Germans call the “lying media.” But, as Dr. Salter notes, it will likely be worse in the second generation, pointing to data showing that second-generation children are vastly more likely to commit crimes.

Thilo Sarrazin has already warned Germans about the consequences of non-European immigration in his book Germany Abolishes Itself. 

Sarrazin documented the slow pace of integration of Turkish immigrants into German society and economy, their disproportionate reliance on government welfare and their higher fertility. He found that slow assimilation was caused by the Islamic religion and lower educational outcomes were caused by persistent ethnic tradition.[xvi] When he wrote this, Angela Merkel was already German Chancellor. She condemned Sarrazin and endorsed his removal from the Deutschebank board, an omen of her 2015 radicalism and intolerance.

Given the (genetically influenced) low IQ and academic achievement of the new immigrants compared to native Germans, there will be ethnic stratification in which ethnicity is correlated with social class — a poisonous situation indeed. As we have noted many times on TOO, this results in the racialization of politics in which people vote along racial/ethnic lines. And because realistic, scientifically based assessments of ability have been purged from the media in favor of leftist narratives of victimization, the poor economic achievement of non-Whites is ascribed to invidious and pervasive White racism. As Dr. Salter notes,

By the second generation poorer immigrant groups, especially those that are culturally or racially visible, become susceptible to radicalization by ideologies that legitimate grievances. These ideologies help immigrants rationalise their low socioeconomic status and sense of alienation by making them out to be victims of white racism. The ideologies are acquired from universities, schools, the media, social workers, politicians and ethnic leaders.

And because this has been a top-down revolution engineered by elites, citizens are not given a meaningful opportunity to vote on issues like immigration policy. Nationalist parties have been formed throughout Europe, but they are vilified by elites in the media and are quarantined in legislatures, so that their influence is minimized. Only an absolute majority will change the situation, and the new immigrants become voters who will support parties that continue these immigration policies and continue the generous welfare benefits. Indeed, Muslims were crucial to the election of traitorous French President François Hollande.

Dr. Salter also notes that ethnic diversity results in loss of civil rights because there are calls for ending traditional liberal freedoms, such as free speech, including especially by nativists who criticize immigration policy. Indeed, the first response after the Cologne attacks was not only to scrub media reports of any mention of the ethnic origins of the criminals, but also to delete Facebook messages that commented on the ethnic nature of the attacks. This is a Tweet I put out on January 2 when the media were still in containment mode:

Laws infringing on free speech, particularly free speech related to immigration and, of course, the holocaust, are already in place in many areas of Europe. The situation will only get worse. Social media are now being policed. As a recent Washington Post article noted:

German authorities … have reached a deal with Facebook, Google and Twitter to get tougher on offensive content, with the outlets agreeing to apply domestic laws, rather than their own corporate policies, to reviews of posts.

It’s predictable that the response to incidents such as the mass sexual assaults in Cologne, Hamburg, and Stuttgart will be enhanced police presence. And when an army of police actually prevent an outbreak of violence, it  will be greeted as a triumph of multiculturalism by the media — “You see, it can work; things are going just fine,” despite the likelihood that many, especially women, will not attend such celebrations at least in the near future. And what a price to pay for being able to have public events. New Year’s Eve celebrations in many areas were marvels of police state surveillance. This is not the culture we want to live in.

A theme of TOO is that Jewish organizations have universally continued to advocate for high levels of immigration and altruistic refugee policies while simultaneously advocating intensification of police-state type controls on thought and behavior to ensure Jewish security (see Andrew Joyce’s “On the return of the protected Jewish minority in Europe”). Having your cake and eating it too.

In the long run, multiculturalism can’t exist without powerful social controls on speech and behavior. As I noted in The Culture of Critique in a passage on the future of multiculturalism in the U.S.,

One may expect that as ethnic conflict continues to escalate in the United States, increasingly desperate attempts will be made to prop up the ideology of multiculturalism with sophisticated theories of the psychopathology of majority group ethnocentrism, as well as with the erection of police state controls on nonconforming thought and behavior. (Chapter 8, pp. 310-311)

Dr. Salter makes the important point that the genetic tendencies underlying the decline in social cohesion are a constant, whereas cultural variables (such as the high-flown moral rhetoric accompanying the welcoming of immigrants) can change quickly.

Indeed culture can change quickly, and we must hope that it will. But a major force upholding the current dispensation is the media. He points out that a media monopoly is necessary for maintaining the current attitudes on immigration and has been in place for decades — another major theme of TOO and one where we emphasize Jewish influence and Jewish ethnic identity as a critical factor.

It comes as no surprise that Merkel et al. frame their policy in terms of love for humanity, but in fact it is a cruel policy, likely to produce suffering across Europe.

She sells her open door policy as humanitarian. But in reality this is a cruel policy likely to produce suffering across Germany and Europe. She has failed to consider the interests of individual European nations or of Europe as a whole. Europe’s political class has, in effect, embraced the most aggressive form of multiculturalism, in which the establishment forms an alliance with minorities to dominate the majority.

The suffering the open door policy will bring – the inequality, including the special evil of ethnic stratification, the collapse of welfare, the crime, the slums and no-go areas, the degradation of women, the racialization of politics, the decline in wages, the loss of national cohesion, the growing sense of loss and alienation among Germans and immigrants alike, the accelerated replacement of Europeans in their ancient homelands, the constriction of civil rights and the pervasive chaos – all of this will last for generations.

Merkel is doubly cruel because she is stripping developing societies of their more educated and industrious people. The inevitable fall in European foreign aid will hurt poor countries around the world, caused by the stagnation of European economies and decline in social capital.

The question remaining is how long before the political reaction becomes intense enough to defeat the political/media/academic class. If this reaction fails to materialize, it will indeed be the end of Western Civilization.

A transcript of Dr. Salter’s video may be found on his website, Social Technologies.

  • Print
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • RSS
  • Add to favorites
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • Technorati

105 Comments to "Dr. Frank Salter on Germany’s Jeopardy"

  1. Karen T's Gravatar Karen T
    January 12, 2016 - 4:15 pm | Permalink

    I think that in all fairness, how this passerby has distorted my posts, that I should have a say if not the last word. Fair play and all

  2. John's Gravatar John
    January 10, 2016 - 7:21 pm | Permalink

    I just watched the BBC program “Talking Business Mass Migration” where the experts explained that Germany is now much better at integrating foreigners than before because they now have programs in place to help them integrate that they didn’t have before and they once again explained that mass migration has been an economic benefit to Germany. I used to (reluctantly) believe those lies even though they didn’t make any sense to me. If the mass of Muslims in Germany are a net economic benefit, shouldn’t their neighborhoods be relatively well-off instead of being poor with disproportionately many of them on welfare benefits? Thilo Sarrazin and now professor Salter have shown those claims that Germany benefits economically from these immigrants to be lies and propaganda.

  3. Mari's Gravatar Mari
    January 9, 2016 - 10:34 pm | Permalink

    IN America the husband less child less middle aged women are in the forefront of the animal rights idiots.
    There are few men in animal rights and mist are husbands friends and sons of the women activist

    A big activity is “adopting” viciou fighting dogs that have been taken away from owners and adopted by these clueless feckless women

    The women are often killed by their newly adopted dogs.

  4. Mari's Gravatar Mari
    January 9, 2016 - 10:13 pm | Permalink

    Once again, thanks to the moderators for getting rid of the endless bible quotes. I detest the idiots who advocate a return to Nordic paganism as well as the bible quoters

    Religion and White Nationalism are two different issues

  5. Mari's Gravatar Mari
    January 9, 2016 - 9:47 pm | Permalink

    Jews have allied against Whites with non White groups for centuries, from Muslims in medieval Spain to their alliance with Jew hating blacks in 20th century America to their late 20th and 21st century attempts to ally with Muslims in Europe.

    It’s good tactics divide and conquer ; create an opposition against the main enemy. In America the gay movement has been a Jewish movement It created a well funded articulate well organized group of White gay activitists against White heterosexuals. The Jew/Feminazis movement created a war between men and women.
    Jew/Muslim Jew/Black Jew/Gay
    Jew/Feminazi, all those alliances served to weaken Whites.

    • Sgt. Pepper's Gravatar Sgt. Pepper
      January 10, 2016 - 10:20 pm | Permalink


      What the Jews are doing is atomizing society; taking the white nations and breaking them up into a multitude of “tribes” that are at each other’s throats. In other words, they are transforming the white nations into middle-eastern societies,

      My theory is that it is instinctive for the Jews to do this, it is part of their evolved psychology.

      It reminds me of the latest Superman movie, “Man of Steel”. In the movie, a group of Kryptonians come to earth, and want to transform it into a Krypton-like planet, and make it their new home. So they start up a machine called a “terraforming engine”— it begins to increase earth’s gravity and change earth’s atmosphere. The machine is destoyed by Superman, saving humanity.

      Instead of Kryptonians, we have Jews. In place of the entire earth, we have the white nations. Mass immigration serves as the “terraforming engine”.

      But unlike the movie, there is no superman to save us from the Jews.

  6. FKA Max's Gravatar FKA Max
    January 9, 2016 - 4:13 pm | Permalink

    [3] Sweden and Norway have existed for many, many centuries, both together and (recently) apart. If they are ‘pathologically altruistic’, where were the vast numbers of Indians, blacks, Arabs etc imported since say 1000 AD? Plenty of time for ‘pathological altruism’ to work. Not the slightest sign of it. Invasion coincides with Jewish power, notably since 1945.



    I think you forget modern means of transportation and communication in your argument against the existence of pathological altruism, and most importantly you forget the population explosion we have seen in the 20th century. The World population growing from ca. 1.6 billion in 1900 to over 7 billion today. Also in 1900 ca. 24% of the World population were of European descent, today it is only ca. 10% https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_human_population#Population_growth_by_region
    We are seeing World Disorder because of and caused by dysgenics.
    More people, especially more low IQ people in the World, means more problems and conflicts, and therefore more pathological altruism can be observed from Northern Europeans, because we constantly have to bail out and balance out, the lower IQ parts of the World, to keep peace and to keep globalization going, etc. Kipling called it the ”White Man’s Burden”, and this burden is growing and growing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_White_Man's_Burden
    I firmly believe pathological altruism is a very real phenomenon and character trait of Northern Europeans, for all the reasons Professor MacDonald has dissertated on.
    I think the reason Jews were able to take hold of Western societies is precisely because of our pathological altruism. They did not cause it, they just exploit it and channel, encourage and manipulate it in their favor and how it best suits them.

    There is a reason why the term ”blue-eyed” is associated with and a synonym for naivete and gullibility in many cultures. It is genetic:

    Having an air or disposition of innocence and/or naïveté, like that of a child. Don’t be so blue eyed, the world is an unforgiving place!


    Here a prime example of Northern European pathological altruism. Another TOO commenter, Sgt. Pepper I believe it was, recently termed it alternatively as ”pathological idealism”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Egeland

    Ylvis – Jan Egeland [Official music video HD]

    Video Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yn-oemgzlEU

    • January 9, 2016 - 11:58 pm | Permalink

      Excellent comment FKA Max.

      But please note that in the year 1900. the share of world population that was of European descent, stood at something closer to 30 percent (and not at the 24% figure offered by the ‘Jewish’ Blog called Wikipedia).

      • FKA Max's Gravatar FKA Max
        January 10, 2016 - 1:12 pm | Permalink

        Thank you very much for the correction, Anglo Saxon.
        I was debating, which percentages I should list for 1900 and in general, around 25% or 30% in 1900 (includes 25% in Europe and 5% in North America) and 10% or 15% respectively (again including North America) for the early 2000s, and then decided to go with the lower numbers, because parts of Russia are considered to be part of Europe in these statistics, and at around 1900 there was also a substantial Jewish population in Eastern Europe, etc. I personally do not consider Slavs the typical light-skinned and light-eyed European stereotype, who is most prone to ”pathological altruism/idealism”. In my experience Slavs are less altruistic than Northern Europeans, which is not a bad thing, especially in the current ”Refugees Welcome” hysteria environment.

        Again, I think, that ”pathological altruism/idealism” is somehow linked to blue eyes, and less so to just light skin color/tone. At the moment 8% of the World population have blue eyes. This might be a very interesting subject to look into to understand altruism more:

        This blue-eyed person must have been special somehow because the blue OCA2 quickly swept through the European population. Soon there were places where blue eyed people outnumbered brown eyed ones.

        We don’t know what made these blue eyed people special. It may have been that they were irresistible to the opposite sex and so had lots more babies than brown eyed people. Or blue eyes may have been tied to some useful Northern European trait like pale skin.

        Whatever the reason for their eye color, these blue eyed people established themselves and spread. And, for various reasons, they tended to have children with only each other.


        Maybe blue-eyed people were such popular mating partners and preferred to mate with each other, because they were more altruistic?

        Blue eyes are indeed becoming less common in the world. One study showed that about 100 years ago, half of U.S. residents had blue eyes. Nowadays only 1 in 6 does.

        What is happening in the U.S. will undoubtedly happen throughout the world as well. Especially as Europe opens itself up to more immigration. This is one of the reasons blue eyes are becoming less common in the U.S. — immigration.

        In the recent past, lots of brown-eyed people have moved here. Even with no other explanation you’d expect a smaller percentage of blue eyed people because of this.

        But this is only part of the story. Another reason blue eyes are declining is because they were at an artificially high level before. In the past, blue-eyed people tended to have kids with other blue-eyed people. When this happens you get blue eyed kids.

        Today people use ethnicity less often as a way to pick a partner. This means that blue eyed people have kids with brown eyed people more often than before. And often that means mostly brown eyed kids.


    • T. Juana's Gravatar T. Juana
      January 10, 2016 - 11:25 am | Permalink

      “. . .I think the reason Jews were able to take hold of Western societies is precisely because of our pathological altruism. . .”

      I certainly disagree. Who controls all Western governments? Who controls 96% of Western media? WHO IS BEHIND THE CENSORSHIP/INFORMATION CONTROL?

      If the main problem is pathological altruism, that implies that White countries would give up everything, and this decision would be theirs alone.

      Max- do you know how much money is involved in immigrant resettlement? Catholic Charities got $6,000,000,000 in the year 2000- from the government.
      [The CC site no longer talks about money].

      Example- Mark Stutrud of Lutheran Social Services received $402,000 [one year]. Is this pathological altruism? IT LOOKS MORE LIKE PATHOLOGICAL GREED- JUST LIKE THE SELF-SACRIFICING FOLKS IN THE MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX.


      • FKA Max's Gravatar FKA Max
        January 10, 2016 - 1:31 pm | Permalink

        Thank you very much for your feedback, T. Juana.

        I don’t think pathological altruism is the only problem or flaw Whites have, and neither are all Whites philanthropic angels, far form it, but on average it seems, that we Whites, especially the blue-eyed variant, seem to be more altruistic than our darker skinned, haired and eyed cousins, even the higher IQ ones in Northeastern Asia. Japan is not taking in any refugees, and neither is China, etc. So altruism seems not to be linked to IQ necessarily.

        My main goal in studying ourselves and our race is the following:

        “Knowing others is intelligence;
        knowing yourself is true wisdom.
        Mastering others is strength;
        mastering yourself is true power.”

        ― Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

        • FKA Max's Gravatar FKA Max
          January 10, 2016 - 6:21 pm | Permalink

          Quick addendum on this blue vs. brown eyes discussion, which could potentially explain, why blue-eyed Germans (Merkel included) and Scandinavians took such a long time to figure out and react to the Islamic Immigration Invasion of Europe in late 2015. I hope they come up with a better long-term strategy to protect Europeans and preserve European culture:

          In a 2007 British study, researchers found that blue eyed people were better at strategic thinking and generally performed better in tasks that required long-term thought, such as running or golf. Meanwhile, brown-eyed subjects had quicker reaction times.


      • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
        January 10, 2016 - 3:13 pm | Permalink

        Hearty applause for AS and TJ.

        I have long been a fan of Bradley Smith’s assessment (published Friday, November 20, 2009, on his own blog) of that Jewish disinfo blog: “… Wikipedia is the place to go if you want it quick, do not want much, and there are no ethical or moral issues involved.” Were it up to me, I’d amend the quote slightly to make it read “Wikipedia is the place to go only if you want it quick …”

        In practical terms, this amounts to trusting Wikipedia for such historical data as past World Series and Super Bowl scores—and precious little else. I reflexively distrust the motives of anyone who makes frequent resort to it to demonstrate anything but Tribal subversion of white Christian societies.

    • Sgt. Pepper's Gravatar Sgt. Pepper
      January 11, 2016 - 12:54 pm | Permalink

      @FKA Max

      I think you’re right, there is a connection in europeans between blue eyes and altruism/idealism.

      But then there is this:

      Blue eyes are common in northern and eastern Europe, particularly around the Baltic Sea. Blue eyes are also found in Southern Europe and Western Asia, especially among the Jewish population of Israel. Many modern Israeli Jews are of European Ashkenazi origin, among whom this trait is common (a study taken in 1911 found that 53.7% of Ukrainian Jews had blue eyes).


      If blue eyes are connected with altruism, then would blue-eyed Jews be less ethnocentric than brown-eyed Jews?

      Perhaps the blue eyes/altruism connection only applies to europeans, and not to Jews (or other non-europeans.) I don’t see any evidence that blue-eyed Jews are “nicer” (i.e. more altruistic toward outsiders) than brown-eyed Jews.

      (I wonder where the Jews got their blue eyes. It must have been from intermarriage with europeans— there are no pure-blooded middle-easterners with blue eyes that I know of.)

      • FKA Max's Gravatar FKA Max
        January 12, 2016 - 12:42 am | Permalink

        If blue eyes are connected with altruism, then would blue-eyed Jews be less ethnocentric than brown-eyed Jews?

        I think yes, Sgt. Pepper.

        Let us just take George Soros, whatever ones thinks about him and his intentions, but he is the epitome of a (misguided) pathological altruist/idealist to me, and he has blue eyes, and his latest wife is Japanese. Mark Zuckerberg has somewhat blue eyes, and is probably more altruistic than the average non-blue-eyed Jew too, even though he probably has ulterior motives with his foundation, and he seems to be less ethno-centric too, since he married a Chinese.

        Other Jews, that have blue eyes, that I have found more reasonable/altruistic/idealistic, but not necessarily less ethno-centric than other Jews, are:

        Richard Haass- President of the Council on Foreign Relations

        Ami Ayalon- Former head of the Shin Bet

        Larry Summers- highly controversial former President of Harvard University

        I myself am inflicted with blue-eyedness, and I am a recovering pathological altruist/idealist.

        As I said, I do not necessarily consider blue eyes an asset or blessing, I am just trying to figure myself and my fellow Northern Europeans out, especially what our weaknesses are, and Professor MacDonald’s research has done an invaluable service to me in this regard and in this pursuit. I am eternally grateful for that.

        This proverb, with this attached particular meaning, has also greatly assisted me in my blue-eye recovery:

        The road to hell is paved with good intentions
        […]or even that good intentions, when acted upon, may have unforeseen bad consequences. An example is the introduction of alien species such as the Asian carp, which has become a nuisance due to unexpected proliferation and behaviour.[8]


        Here an interesting link on Jews and eye-color:

        The Jews have usually black or brown eyes.

        It will be observed that the frequency of light,particularly blue, eyes among Jews reaches 25 per cent in some series (Ammon, Beddoe, Fishberg, Weissenberg). Some anthropologists claim that this trait points to intermixture of foreign, non-Semitic blood, especially Aryan. In support of this view it is shown that in those countries where light-colored eyes are frequent among the indigenous population the Jews also show a larger percentage of blue and of gray eyes. This can be seen in Table No. 2. In Baden over 50 per cent of Jewish recruits have blue or gray eyes; in Russia the percentage is less; while in Caucasia, where the native races have dark eyes, the Jews show 84.31 per cent of dark eyes. The English Sephardim show even a higher percentage of blue eyes than the Ashkenazim.

        An important phenomenon in connection with the eyes of Jews is the variation of color according to sex. It appears from the figures in Table No. 2 that the eyes of Jewesses are darker than those of Jews. Joseph Jacobs sees in this a comparatively small variability of type among Jewesses as compared with Jews (“Racial Characteristics of Modern Jews,” in “Jour. Anthropological Institute,” 1885, v.).


        • Sgt. Pepper's Gravatar Sgt. Pepper
          January 12, 2016 - 2:24 pm | Permalink

          Let us just take George Soros, whatever ones thinks about him and his intentions, but he is the epitome of a (misguided) pathological altruist/idealist to me, and he has blue eyes, and his latest wife is Japanese.

          I’m not sure what you mean by Soros being the epitome of a pathological altruist/idealist— unless what you mean by “epitome” is that he superficially resembles an altruist/idealist— without actually being one.

          If Soros isn’t actually an altruist/idealist (even though he may pretend to be one), then Soros does not demonstrate a connection between blue eyes and altruism in Jews.

        • FKA Max's Gravatar FKA Max
          January 12, 2016 - 8:11 pm | Permalink

          Sgt. Pepper,
          I am assuming, rightly or wrongly, that Soros is an authentic altruist/idealist, and not just pretending to be one, and he just does not realize how much damage he is doing, and that he is actually undermining and self-sabotaging his own cause and goal of open, free and harmonious societies in Europe by inviting foreign cultures and races into Europe, especially lower IQ Muslims. I am saying, that Soros has no ulterior motives and he does not want to hurt or punish Whites consciously or even subconsciously, his intentions are pure, but misguided, because not based upon racial and cultural realism, etc., even though he is likely to be a very intelligent person, he is either lacking or ignoring this essential information. It is a case of incomplete information on his part in my opinion, why he is doing so much damage. The same goes for Merkel et al. He is causing particularly severe damage because of the funds he has available to him, but he is not much different than other non-Jewish blue-eyed persons according to my theory.
          If we pursue this train of thought, I am basically saying/claiming, that blue-eyed Jews are different from non-blue-eyed Jews, but they are still doing damage to White Western societies because they are pathological altruists, but so do White pathologically altruistic blue-eyed people. The conclusion to this would be, that blue-eyed Whites do more damage to themselves than anybody else does, Jews included, even though non-blue-eyed Jews are probably the most proficient in exploiting this blue eye weakness.
          One indicator for this to me in the case of George Soros is, that he is no friend of Israel, but this does not mean, that he does not care about the well-being and welfare and safety of Jews. As Professor MacDonald has stated, Jews are not monolithic. Barbara Spectre for example has brown eyes, so I believe, that she is just faking her altruism and is highly ethnocentric and wants to primarily help the Jews, but with blue-eyed Soros I don’t think he is faking it, but he still things in his mind, that more open and tolerant societies will protect Jews, but he wants to help all humans not just Jews. This is the difference between a blue-eyed and a darker-eyed Jew to me. The one is a true believer and philanthropist, albeit misguided (Soros), while the other is an impostor and faker who hates Whites (Spectre):

          Soros is a prominent donor to J Street, and made a speech in front of the Jewish Funders Network where he said “European anti-Semitism is the result of the policies of Israel and the United States.” He has said that “America is the gravest threat to world freedom” and generally stands against many Western interests.
          Former United States Senator Joe Lieberman has said that Soros’s views on America are “so negative, so critical, and so often anti-American.” Simply, this man who is a major funder of Hillary is no friend of Israel. Hillary must dis-associate from the world’s most dangerous billionaire.


          I think blue-eyes, for whatever reason, which I don’t completely claim to have certainty on, cause pathological altruism/idealism, and it affects Jews equally as much as it affects white Europeans, and maybe/probably even other races.
          I could, of course be absolutely wrong, but I think we need to look into the effect and significance of blue eyes, and how they potentially alter a person’s body and brain chemistry, etc., and therefore the person’s actions, perceptions, etc. This could be explained by melanin levels, and how we absorb more sunlight and our skin produces more Vitamin D, etc. Maybe since lighter/bluer eyes also absorb sunlight more easily, this could affect brain function/chemistry, which could be the explanation for pathological altruism/idealism (we could also alternatively call it pathological optimism I guess). This optimism probably assisted in battling and surviving the unforgiving cold climate of the the North, but it is highly counter-productive in dealing with Muslim invaders or Jewish infiltrators.

          This study would be independent of race, and would primarily explore, if a connection between blue-eyes and pathological altruism/idealism can be established and confirmed.

          Since White Europeans have the highest percentage of blues eyes, our societies are the most affected by pathological altruism/idealism, but that does not mean, that it cannot exist in other societies. However it will not manifest very prevalently and relevantly, because these races/nations/societies are not majority blue-eyed, which is only the case in Northern European countries, and it used to be the case in North America ( in the early 20th century blue-eyed people made up about 50% of the U.S. population, today it is only about 16%), which seem to be the most pathologically altruistic and idealistic regions on the planet.

          Also a quick correction from my above reply. It should have said: ”I myself am afflicted (not inflicted) with blue-eyedness, and I am a recovering pathological altruist/idealist.”

          I hope I was able to explain where I am coming from, Sgt. Pepper. Even though, there are blue-eyed Jews, the majority of Jews is not blue-eyed, and therefore highly ethnocentric and not pathologically altruistic or idealistic. This discussion is more about us blue-eyed Whites, than about blue-eyed Jews or others. I just used Jewish examples to illustrate my point/claim, that even Jews, who are are notoriously ethnocentric, seem to be affected by having blue eyes. All this absolutely does not change anything about Professor MacDonald’s research on the Jews, since blue-eyed Jews are a minority within the Jewish community. It really is about the Northern European community, and how maybe we need can improve and secure our White Western societies, by applying and incorporating this blue eyes knowledge. For example it would probably be good if our police forces would be mostly staffed by darker eyed Whites, who are less pathologically altruistic/idealistic, but our school teachers and university professors for example, should be blue-eyed because they would inspire and mentor our youngsters well, etc.

  7. Holger's Gravatar Holger
    January 9, 2016 - 9:06 am | Permalink

    I cannot believe these vulgar insults from this person called @buckle.

    This person has very little knowledge of German history or is just trolling.

    You and other English-speakers are the useless ones. You are so Jew-infested and that is the reason we are all in trouble.

    • January 9, 2016 - 11:23 am | Permalink

      @Holger. I am a native English speaker. I have viewed the comments posted by buckle in this thread and I can say with confidence he is NOT posting vulgar insults at Germany or the German people.

      I totally sympathize with your frustrations and anger. For several years now I have been fighting (as a keyboard warrior) to uphold the honour and dignity of the German people. I have seen the extent of the filth spread by our collective enemies.

      Please be assured, buckle’s intentions are very sincere.

      His literary style (English Grammar) may be British, which is often loaded with irony. Therefore, I have no problem interpreting exactly what he means to say.

      Most of those who speak English as a 2nd language (like your good self??) have difficulty recognizing and interpreting the irony. They instead read the sentences literally. In which case, they don’t get the true meaning.

      It’s okay Holger. You are with Friends, Brothers, and Sisters here! Buckle is a Brother.

    • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
      January 9, 2016 - 2:49 pm | Permalink


      “what makes Germany great is her admirable popular culture, which has penetrated all parts of the Empire evenly. And is it not the many different princely residences from whence this culture springs and which are its bearers and curators? Just assume that for centuries only the two capitals of Vienna and Berlin had existed in Germany or even only a single one. Then I wonder what would have happened to the German culture and the widespread prosperity that goes hand in hand with culture.”

      Hans-Hermann Hoppe on Goethe’s view of national greatness.

  8. buckle's Gravatar buckle
    January 8, 2016 - 10:36 pm | Permalink

    Reunification was a big mistake. It was permitted in the West in order to consolidate the collapse of the Soviet Empire. Germany needs to break up into “lands” which was it’s situation prior to Bismarck. Europe needs more Hungarys not one useless Germany.

    • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
      January 9, 2016 - 2:41 pm | Permalink

      Even worse, German unification was only allowed by Mitterand on condition that she accept the Euro and give up the Deutschmark. Mitterand considered the DM a competitive threat. The disaster continues to this day.

  9. Joe's Gravatar Joe
    January 8, 2016 - 10:03 pm | Permalink

    “…atoning for National Socialism is an explicitly stated goal of Angela Merkel’s migration policy.”
    This is all so absurd. Using this same “logic”, we should all back whatever the jews want because we must “atone” for our beliefs in the teachings of Jesus Christ (who the jews also had destroyed). Did you ever stop to think who is more despised by the tribe – Jesus or Hitler? It’s hard to tell. Their brilliant scribes haven’t had enough time to write into their Talmud how Hitler is boiling in hot semen along side Jesus. Of course, this is not to compare the two men, but one has to wonder who they hate more – and that equation says a lot about recent as well as past history. What the two had in common was their quest to overthrow the evil power of the highly organized biblical demons who have thwarted the natural ascent of mankind since the dawn of recorded history.

  10. buckle's Gravatar buckle
    January 8, 2016 - 3:44 pm | Permalink

    The Allied troops carried out more rapes against German women in 1945 than the present Muslim population. The tragedy is the Muslim immigrants know only too well the contempt in which Germans are held generally.

  11. Barkingmad's Gravatar Barkingmad
    January 8, 2016 - 2:41 pm | Permalink

    I am rather perplexed about the Cologne business now making the mainstream media over here. It is on Yahoo now. I would never have thought! The Chief of Police has been sacked because of mis-handling of New Years’ Eve activities.

  12. Observer's Gravatar Observer
    January 8, 2016 - 1:24 pm | Permalink

    The role of Jews going forward in this scenario will be interesting. My take is that they have indeed had a historical emnity against white folks, often with disastrous results for both. But the antisemitism of Arabs and Muslims is extremely virulent, so at what point do they rethink their position on promoting mass Muslim migration?

    • TZ's Gravatar TZ
      January 8, 2016 - 6:45 pm | Permalink

      Perhaps they hate both of the groups and wish to agitate both against each others to get an orgasmic blood ritual with tens of millions deaths after which can be formed a world goverment to guarantee this sort of event will never happen again.

    • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
      January 9, 2016 - 2:59 pm | Permalink

      Exactly. The messianic dream is only partially realized.

  13. Art's Gravatar Art
    January 8, 2016 - 1:20 pm | Permalink


    “It’s not clear that Germany has a choice in the matter. There are still 50,000 occupying troops in the country, 70 years on. Presumably there to stop any outbreak of nationalism.”

    Good point!

  14. Passer by's Gravatar Passer by
    January 8, 2016 - 1:20 pm | Permalink

    What these people did (in some cases) in Germany is called a “mob rape”. A hundred arab men surrounding single european woman. Something like this happened to Lara Logan in Egypt. There is actual video footage of one similar attack that happened in Egypt, the victim was a dutch woman.


  15. Gotcha's Gravatar Gotcha
    January 8, 2016 - 7:01 am | Permalink

    I don’t really see how the German authorities can blackout news in this Internet age. Twitter, Facebook are not the only options plus tools like TOR are handy in evading IP address blocking.

    On a positive note the farce of political correctness has been expunged. The long dormant immunue response to race-replacement is now active.

    • January 11, 2016 - 7:04 am | Permalink

      There are several alternatives (although not exact replicas) of Facebook and Twitter. Currently the two most popular are Diaspora* and Minds.com.

  16. Sir Winston Londonstan's Gravatar Sir Winston Londonstan
    January 7, 2016 - 11:37 pm | Permalink

    The Colone ‘attacks’ might be a false flag . ?? To discredit religion and to generate a pro war sentiment for Syria ?

    • Curmudgeon's Gravatar Curmudgeon
      January 8, 2016 - 9:24 am | Permalink

      Virtually everything at Veterans Today is a false flag.

      • T. Juana's Gravatar T. Juana
        January 8, 2016 - 2:59 pm | Permalink

        The owner of VT admits that 30% of the info is false, but refuses to tell us which 30%.

      • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
        January 8, 2016 - 4:35 pm | Permalink

        Die Truman Show, a German classic.

        • Curmudgeon's Gravatar Curmudgeon
          January 9, 2016 - 6:49 am | Permalink

          Thanks. I’ll make time to watch it.

        • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
          January 9, 2016 - 3:14 pm | Permalink

          A bit of leg-pulling on my part. Nevertheless, even if it’s pure (((Hollywood))), the message seems especially relevant to Germany. Own the context and the mind’s yours.

  17. Sir Winston Londonstan's Gravatar Sir Winston Londonstan
    January 7, 2016 - 11:12 pm | Permalink

    Here is another interesting link regarding Cologne .The system finally admits they have a real problem . But it appears the implied answer is to militarize the police .

    Since I don’t bother being insulted by the ‘TV’ propaganda or News as THEY call it , I found this discription quite interesting .

    • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
      January 8, 2016 - 4:37 pm | Permalink

      Cui bono?

  18. January 7, 2016 - 6:54 pm | Permalink

    From September 2, 2003
    — As it becomes ever more difficult for foreigners to enter a United States wary of terrorism, several Jewish groups are urging immigration authorities to relax rules for asylum seekers.( BUT NOT FOR ISRAEL )
    A coalition of 15 Jewish groups is raising a red flag about the practice of turning away asylum seekers who have used false documents. They argue that refugees fleeing persecution in their home countries are being denied the right to “due process” when they come to the United States.
    The groups, including the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, the American Jewish Committee and the Anti- Defamation League,

  19. January 7, 2016 - 6:30 pm | Permalink


    Cologne Mayor Henriette Reker recommended that German women should change their behavior and follow a special set of rules to avoid sexual harassment, German media reported.

    Flush Angela Merkel

    Reker’s statement caused strong criticism among local residents and journalists who accused the mayor of trying to shift the blame for sexual harassment to the victims.

    The German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung was the first to react to Merkel’s words, releasing an article entitled “Women, hide”. The author accused Reker of an attempt to shift the responsibility to the victims of violence and called her stance “impudence.” Later, German TV channel N24 assumed that the Cologne mayor was “not in her right mind.”

    In a short expert from “The Jewish Community of Sweden,” an Israel Up Close broadcast, Barbara Lerner Spectre, who runs a government-funded Jewish study group in Sweden, makes the following statement on the Jewish involvement of multiculturalism and immigration of non-Europeans into Europe:

    “I think there is a resurgence of anti-Semitism because at this point in time Europe (& America) has not yet learned how to be multicultural. And I think we are going to be part of the throes of that transformation, which must take place. Europe is not going to be the monolithic societies they once were in the last century. Jews are going to be at the centre of that. It’s a huge transformation for Europe to make. They are now going into a multicultural mode and Jews will be resented because of our leading role. But without that leading role and without that transformation, Europe will not survive.”

    Israel is boldly willing to spare not a single square meter of
    Europe for ‘Refugees / Invadergees
    http://newobserveronline.com/israel-bars-refugees-builds-wall-while-jews-support-refugee-invasion-of-europe/ (AND AMERICA )
    Israel Bars “Refugees,” Builds Wall—While Jews Support “Refugee” Invasion of Europe
    In yet another astonishing display of hypocritical Jewish Supremacism, the Israeli government has refused to accept any “refugees” from Syria or Africa—and is building a new wall to keep them out—while Israel-supporting Jews in Europe and America continue to demand that non-Jewish countries accept all Third World invaders without question.

    Israel is so selfless when it comes to giving away other
    Peoples Nations

  20. T. Juana's Gravatar T. Juana
    January 7, 2016 - 5:09 pm | Permalink

    From Netanyahu’s infamous “Fink’s Bar [Jerusalem] diatribe” of 1990:

    “If we get caught they will just replace us with persons of the same cloth. So it does not matter what you do, America is a golden calf and we will suck it dry, chop it up, and sell it off piece by piece until there is nothing left but the world’s biggest welfare state that we will create and control. Why? Because it is the will of God and America is big enough to take the hit so we can do it again and again and again. This is what we do to countries that we hate. We destroy them very slowly and make them suffer for refusing to be our slaves.” (Credit to the Defense Intelligence Agency of the United States Department of Defense)

  21. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    January 7, 2016 - 4:49 pm | Permalink

    The indivisible welfare/warfare State. Good riddance to both. Western civilization wasn’t born with Bismarck, though it might come close to dying thanks to him.

    • Curmudgeon's Gravatar Curmudgeon
      January 8, 2016 - 9:49 am | Permalink

      I do not follow your “the indivisible/warfare state” statement. Many states such as Iceland, Andorra, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark, and Malta have much better welfare available to citizens than the USA, yet none of them are “warfare states”. Clearly welfare and warfare are divisible.

      As for Bismarck, regaining German territory seized by Louis XIV is hardly warfare. Austria, France, and other countries had pension schemes long before Bismarck became a somebody.
      Welfare has always existed, there is even a Christmas carol about welfare: Good King Wenceslaus.

      • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
        January 8, 2016 - 3:12 pm | Permalink

        Well, even the smaller States cited have high military spending:

        Bismarck saw the Welfare State as a way of centralizing and so increasing his power. Irrespective of the merits/demerits of their military campaigns, the universal conscription instigated by Napoleon and subsequently Bismarck was copied by virtually every developed nation and the stage set for WWI and others.

        As for Wencelaus, he was only a duke and the rest is good part legend. Nevertheless, I think the monarchical political system far superior to the present one. Most people recognized that taxes were for the king’s personal pleasure, not the good of the people. People looked to their comunity or the Church for succour, not to the monarch.

        • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
          January 8, 2016 - 4:44 pm | Permalink

          “community”. How that slipped my eye l’ll never know.

        • Curmudgeon's Gravatar Curmudgeon
          January 9, 2016 - 7:05 am | Permalink

          Smaller states have a natural higher per capita spending, depending on their geography. An island state will have to have watercraft, and likely aircraft. Landlocked states do not.

          Curiously, I agree with your assessment of the current political system. Monarchies have a vested interest in the long term view, because they wanted their lineage to continue. They didn’t particularly want or like foreigners, unless they were from a country that had a relative as a Monarch. Their safety was the loyalty of the masses, who would become the army to defend when necessary. The most positive aspect, in my opinion, was that you knew the source of the problem. Today, the problem is hidden by dozens of layers of misdirection, and most do not want to cut through the layers.
          As for welfare, it works well in homogeneous states, particularly when the citizenry is not into globalization. It does not work well in the ever increasing multicult for all of the reasons Dr. Salter has provided. Homogeneous societies are extended community. Multicult = many communities.

        • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
          January 9, 2016 - 3:27 pm | Permalink

          Salter hasn’t at all proved that State welfare works, only that the commonweal is best served when there is one people, an uncontroversial point on the Alt-right. Look at Japan’s looming pension-debt bomb if you want to imagine that State welfare in a homogeneuous context ends happily.

        • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
          January 9, 2016 - 3:43 pm | Permalink

          Not necessarily. Look at AFghanistan. Essentially an anarchic situtation with tribal militia and no defense spending. And look how they’ve humbled some of their would-be conquerors with decentralized forces and intense clan loyalty. Somalia, too, was a nightmare. Guerrilla, from memory, was coined after Napoleon’s conquest of Spain was thwarted by loyalist militia.

  22. John S.'s Gravatar John S.
    January 7, 2016 - 4:33 pm | Permalink

    The only way for Whites to survive in the coming decades is to engage in nothing less than a bloody revolution; and if there is a different way to resolve the influx of immigration and the ongoing trend of egalitarianism, please tell me how we can survive as a group, because I see no other way out of this mess.

    Turning to Jesus for help will not do justice!

    • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
      January 8, 2016 - 4:55 pm | Permalink

      Put me on that mailing-list.

    • Luke's Gravatar Luke
      January 8, 2016 - 7:30 pm | Permalink

      The panty wetting cries we hear from the gutless Whites who constantly plead for ‘Jesus’ to come to our rescue and who claim that that is what they are waiting for – are simply using Jesus as an excuse for them to continue to do NOTHING to save themselves.

      These wimpy, cucked Christians are truly a worthless bunch of cowards.

  23. buckle's Gravatar buckle
    January 7, 2016 - 3:30 pm | Permalink

    It’s not clear that Germany has a choice in the matter. There are still 50,000 occupying troops in the country, 70 years on. Presumably there to stop any outbreak of nationalism.

    • January 8, 2016 - 11:33 am | Permalink

      Presumption is not necessary! That is precisely why the U.S. Military Occupation Force is still stationed on German soil. That, and because the U.S. is merely a tool (a willing wench) for implementing the Talmudic zeitgeist and Zionist global plan.

  24. Michael D.'s Gravatar Michael D.
    January 7, 2016 - 2:49 pm | Permalink

    This will all boomerang back at the elites. If we are constantly reminded that we live in the shadow of Hitler, just remember this, Hitler and his general staff believed the Soviet Union would easily fall (Halder said the war was won 2 weeks into the East invasion) and look how that turned out (unfortunately) for the mightiest army in the world. We will win, just keep the asymmetrical warfare going! (leave comments everywhere; eg Breitbart visitors are starting to get it, that even they are part of the system).

  25. Mr Curious's Gravatar Mr Curious
    January 7, 2016 - 2:39 pm | Permalink

    I was reading report about this in The Sun today (btw great essay on media bias by Rod Liddle too). It quoted Merkel: “Crimes must be punished, regardless of origin”. Why did she need to add the qualifier? Implies that up to now the polizei have not enforced the law against priveleged groups!

  26. January 7, 2016 - 1:58 pm | Permalink

    You describe the situation in Germany exactly, Prof. MacDonald. I am German myself, I have always lived in Germany and I want to add some very positive signals. The new situation of a tsunami-like inflow of third-world-people into Germany, Austria, and Sweden is only 4 months old, since September 2015. But it has the potential either to kill the German people within a few years and also lead Europe and the white countries into a catastrophe or this happening will trigger the freedomfight (fight for survival) of Europe and the white world as a whole. — What is the positive sign? Before September 2015, we had also a strong inflow plus a biological becoming more of non-Europeans in Germany, especially Turks, but also others. This effect also would have killed our people within the time span of a few coming decades. A visit in the schools in the west German large cities shows this very clearly. And we Germans would have had no chance of survival because of the relative slowness of that process. We would not have had the chance for a fight, we would have been disappeared slowly. But now- at least in Germany – the end fight is coming. Many Germans have a very clear inner compass and that compass shows away from multikulti and death and it shows towards normal live and towards our own survival. Now the events in Cologne at Sylvester 2015 have triggered that feeling to come from inside to outside. Even the “good-doers” (Gutmenschen) seek a backdoor through which they can go away and let their decades-old multikultipropaganda behind. I wish a good future to all white folks in the world!

    • FLODA's Gravatar FLODA
      January 7, 2016 - 5:14 pm | Permalink

      Well said Herr Karlfried!
      Germans need to have a severe endkampf indeed. I say for it to be effective it should resemble the Hungarian uprising in 1956. Frau Merkel is not stupid nor is she doing this out of some misguided altruism, she knows millions of military age Muslim and African males without Girlfriends are a biological weapon against German ethnicity!

      She and the criminals who control her are deliberately seeking to destroy, first the German race, then all Europeans! They have no intention of stopping the
      hordes from arriving! They are betting Germans have been so weakened by 70 years of Holohoax guilt that they wouldn’t dream of doing what the Hungarians did 60 years ago and take up sniper positions outside Government offices and begin shooting the treasonous swine in the head!

      The time has come for German men under age 50 to take the gloves off, this is not the time for political correctness, you are in a fight! The enemy is not just inside Germany’s gates, the enemy is in your Parliament, it makes your laws, it runs your lügenpresse, it sits in hostile judgement of you in your courts. When, not if it comes to it, remember German police know better than anyone what you are dealing with. I’d say they, like the Hungarian Army who sided with the Civilians and armed them in 1956, German police would side with Germans.

      • Christine's Gravatar Christine
        January 8, 2016 - 7:54 am | Permalink

        Ordo ab Chao, Order out of Chaos has been the motto of the behind the scenes puppetmasters for a long time. What you are suggesting, Floda and Karlfried, has to be done carefully and with a cool head, a commitment to our ancestors, our culture, our people and our descendants. We cannot allow bloodshed in the streets, a different method will have to be planned.
        Meanwhile a lot of money is being made by politicians, the Caritas, Social Service Agencies of all kinds, and….. the financial industries like ORS Service AG which runs a camp in Austria.

        • January 8, 2016 - 9:49 am | Permalink

          I agree with you, Christine.

          Meanwhile a lot of money is being made by politicians, the Caritas, Social Service Agencies of all kinds, and….. the financial industries like ORS Service AG which runs a camp in Austria.

          As Prof. Mac Donald wrote several times on this blog, there are strong incentives to become an active partner in the process that will bring the white folks into the hell. If you partizipate in this process, you will be heavily rewarded (at the cost of the whole white folk). — This story of the incentives for evil things is also in the bible (the devil gives promises to Jesus Christ) , also in literature ( “Faust” from Goethe) as well as in the fairy tales of the Grimm brothers (selling your soul to the devil). — And we have it in the Germany of today. The “Chistian” churches profit heavily from the inflow of third world people. Please sit down and read the following sentence: For incoming foreigners under 18 years old, with no parents with them (that is: anchor childs) the catholic church makes a package: accomodation, eating, teaching, full service. And the church gets money for this service. From the German cities, the German government, the German taxpayer: Per day per such foreign person 335 Euro. That is per year much more than 100,000Euro (roundabout the same in US-Dollar). — For those who are able to understand German, the officiell source for this is:

          http://www.badische-zeitung.de/suedwest-1/die-wichtigsten-fragen-zu-minderjaehrigen-fluechtlingen–85239383.html Welche Kosten entstehen dabei? In Freiburg bekommt das Christophorus Jugendwerk 335 Euro pro Tag pro Jugendlichen.

        • FKA Max's Gravatar FKA Max
          January 8, 2016 - 3:25 pm | Permalink

          Very good points, Karlfried and Christine.

          The Archdiocese of Cologne is probably one of the most powerful Catholic dioceses in the world, both in terms of political and financial power:

          Cologne, the largest (in terms of inhabitants non-Catholics included) and reportedly richest diocese in Europe, announced in October 2013 that “in connection with the current discussion about Church finances” that its archbishop had reserves amounting to 166.2 million Euro in 2012. It said the 9.6 million Euro earnings from its investments were, as in previous years, added to the diocesan budget of 939 million Euro in 2012, three-quarters of which was financed by the “church tax” levied on churchgoers.[2] In 2015 the archdiocese for the first time published its financial accounts, which show assets worth more than £2bn. Documents posted on the archdiocesan website showed assets of €3.35bn (£2.5bn) at the end of 2013. Some € 2.4 billion (£1.8bn) were invested in stocks, funds and company holdings. A further €646m (£475m) were held in tangible assets, mostly property. Cash reserves and outstanding loans amounted to about €287m (£211m).[3]


          Konrad Adenauer was the Mayor of Cologne before he became the first Chancellor of West-Germany after World War II. He was protected by the Catholic Church during the Hitler years, and in my opinion the Archdiocese of Cologne and the Vatican played a crucial role in him becoming the first post-WW II Chancellor of West-Germany. He was devoutly Catholic and a convinced anti-Prussian:

          Reflecting his background as a Catholic Rhinelander who had long chafed under Prussian rule, Adenauer believed that Prussianism was the root cause of National Socialism, and that only by driving out Prussianism could Germany become a democracy.[27] In a December 1946 letter, Adenauer wrote that the Prussian state in the early 19th century had become an “almost God-like entity” that valued state power over the rights of individuals.[27] Adenauer’s dislike of Prussia even led him to oppose Berlin as a future capital.[28] Adenauer’s Sonderweg view of German history, with National Socialism as a natural outgrowth out of Prussianism, sharply contrasted with the views of the Social Democratic leader Kurt Schumacher, who saw National Socialism as a natural outgrowth of capitalism.[29] These two radically differing views of recent German history led Adenauer and Schumacher in turn to recommend very different solutions for a better future. For Schumacher, to banish National Socialism meant replacing the capitalist system with a Marxist socialist system, whereas, for Adenauer, banishing National Socialism meant purging Prussianism.


          There is a term/expression in German known as ”Kölner Klüngel”, which refers to corruption, nepotism and networking, which the Catholic inhabitants of Cologne are known for, and this term is directly related and associated with the power the Catholic Church has in that city and in the greater region. What happened in Cologne on New Year’s Eve 2015/2016, and especially the delayed/false reporting on it, I think has much to do with said ”Kölner Klüngel” and the power of the Catholic Church, in that city, and in Germany in general: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%B6lner_Kl%C3%BCngel

          Köln/Cologne is also the gay capital of Europe, with some estimates putting the homosexual portion of the population at around or over 10%:

          Cologne Gay Pride takes place annually in Cologne, Germany. Events in recent years had over 1 million participants.


          We will see how the gays and Muslims will get along…

          One of my very close family associations, who happens to be Catholic, actually worked closely with and for the current Archbishop of Cologne, Rainer Woelki, before he took over in Cologne: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainer_Woelki

          This friend is a very nice person, but unfortunately that person has bought the ”Refugees Welcome and all Germans who disagree are Nazis” narrative hook, line, and sinker. Probably also because the departments, this person is in charge of for the Catholic Church in Germany greatly benefit financially from the refugee influx, and not going along with the narrative could have adverse effects on job security or future promotions, etc.

          One of Cardinal Woelki’s first big public and symbolic acts in office as the new Archbishop of Cologne, was to turn off the lighting of the Cologne Cathedral (Kölner Dom) because of a PEGIDA demonstration in the city: http://thinkprogress.org/world/2015/01/05/3608048/catholic-cathedral-in-germany-speaks-out-against-growing-anti-islam-movement/


          Using the word “Helau” in Cologne will not be taken kindly.


        • Floda's Gravatar Floda
          January 10, 2016 - 7:44 pm | Permalink

          I agree with you Christine, but you had better get busy. The enemy planned this long ago, their next step is to have the otherwise unemployable Muslim vermin become a very large part of the Police and Bundeswehr. Already one German minister claims at least another Million will arrive this coming year, while there are TEN Million more ready to come behind them. This is no time to pussyfoot around, your enemy wants you dead!

          Instead of Germans chanting ‘Merkel must weg!’ or German crowds timidly booing her, what has to happen is snipers need to be stationed there looking for a clean head shot! The enemy will use the full power of the state to crush opponents of their genocidal plan. A fight is coming and it will be unlike any ever seen before.

          Merkel and her inner sanctum need to be eliminated and quickly. The time for listening politely as they spew lie after lie is over. Every man or woman connected to or in any other way assisting Merkel’s planned genocide of Earth’s most industrious and intelligent people needs to know they are targeted and opening a door or switching on a Vehicle’s ignition could be their last act.

          Let it be known that it includes the clergy and members of your infamous ‘lügenpresse’.

      • Mr Darcy's Gravatar Mr Darcy
        January 8, 2016 - 8:39 am | Permalink

        Read this. You can skim or skip the first three sections and start with part 4: http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3366283/posts

        • January 8, 2016 - 2:06 pm | Permalink

          Mr. Darcy, Thank you for the interesting link.

        • Bernie Busch's Gravatar Bernie Busch
          January 11, 2016 - 7:57 pm | Permalink

          The analogy to the Lunar Offensive TET writ super large makes sense. I hope the Germans can find their Grandfathers Mausers, they’re going to need them.

      • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
        January 8, 2016 - 10:07 pm | Permalink

        Angela Merkel is not under the control of “criminals” who dictate policy to her. To think that is to transport oneself voluntarily to Fantasyland—or better, to Max the Troll’s playground: Wikipedia.

        As Floda writes, Merkel is not stupid, but neither is she merely a weapon. Rather, she sits at the highest table—the Jews’ private Security Council, if you will—with the other architects and executors of historic Germany’s planned destruction. That is to say, she is the genuine criminal article herself.

        The only real question is whether she will continue to prosper or will suddenly find herself chairless once her work comes to fruition and Germany lies dead in a sea of its own blood. Will her assistance and expertise still be required to transfer the other nations of the former Christendom from artificial life support to the morgue?

        I have lost virtually all hope that authentic Germans will survive this invasion, let alone repel it. If I were a betting man, I’d be placing what little cash I have on the likelihood that this year or the next will be for Germany what 711 was for Visigothic Spain. I doubt, too, whether enough of today’s Germans retain a sense of Germanness comparable to the eighth-century Spaniards’ sense of Spanishness—that is to say, enough to get them through several centuries of enslavement and extirpation in recognizable fragments, never mind one piece.

        May God help them. Certainly no one in this vale of tears is prepared to.

        • January 9, 2016 - 11:08 am | Permalink

          I pray you are wrong Pierre, but I fear you may be proven correct. The situation is extremely serious. Unimaginably serious in fact.

          And how about this for arrogance and her seat “at the highest table”? In the midst of this crisis, Angela Merkel is (believe it or not) set to address an international conference dedicated to “fighting people who don’t like Jews”.

          This is an Anglo-Jewish initiative, and the conference will be co-hosted by the German government in Berlin in March, 2016.


          Personally, I cannot stand the sight of her. But irrespective of my sense of impotence, it increasingly looks like Merkel will have to be assassinated, in order to provide the necessary symbolism that shouts … enough is enough!

        • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
          January 9, 2016 - 2:15 pm | Permalink

          Dear AS,

          What extraordinary tidings you bear! The woman truly has no shame.

          I wonder whether she’ll take this opportunity to proudly confirm what many hereabouts have suspected for months or longer: that she herself is at least half-Jewish, perhaps a good deal more.

          Given that I quite agree with your closing remarks, especially with regard to the symbolic weight of such an action, I admit to puzzlement that no attempts at her forcible removal have yet come to light. I take this inaction as sadly indicative that our fears for Germany’s survival are well founded. It isn’t as if one can readily picture a scenario where her elimination would do Germans more harm than good! Who would shed a tear for this genocidal monster?

    • January 8, 2016 - 9:52 am | Permalink

      Karlfried, as an American living in the Frankfurt/M area, I can verify your statements.

      If you would like to share with me some groups, who are working for the defense of Germany, I would be interested in offering my efforts for such a cause.

      Perhaps my email address is visible, here.

      • January 8, 2016 - 2:07 pm | Permalink

        Carl, interesting music with Stealing the Bride. We shall seek contact.

    • January 8, 2016 - 11:41 am | Permalink

      I am English Herr Karlfried, and I humbly beg forgiveness, on behalf of my foolish people, for being drawn (against our instincts) into an evil, fratricidal war against the proud, brilliant, and beautiful German people and nation. You tried to save Europe during 1937-42. Churchill was disgusting sub-human filth, and I look forward to the day when England will finally smash into fragments every statue currently standing of that garrulous war-monger and war-criminal.

  27. Europa's Gravatar Europa
    January 7, 2016 - 1:55 pm | Permalink

    This is a very good analysis of events. This person knows the problem well unlike someone who thinks the solution is moving to New Zealand or Canada.


    This is indeed the real problem not these primitive invaders who have brought “Tahrir Square” to Germany or Karachi to London. The cost has been very high including becoming a vassal of Israel and its American puppet and accepting primitives.

    By the way. These attacks are neither new nor only happened on Cologne. They have been going on for sometime on a smaller scale and like the sex scandals in the UK, the ruling elites have been keeping news quiet. In fact what you read in English is a “sanitised” version. Details like attacks on the police have been omitted. German speakers can read detailed accounts from regional newspapers that are less politically correct than the big news media.

    • Jack Mite's Gravatar Jack Mite
      January 7, 2016 - 4:44 pm | Permalink

      You are quite right. As an Australian myself, I can assure you that we experience the identical problems brought about by the same Judeo-Marxist forces that have undermined Europe. Yes, you can move to Australia, but you will have the same fight on your hands, so why move? We would love to have you here, but stay, and fight for what is yours in familiar territory. Five generations ago Europe was mine, too. The thought of it falling before an Afro-Semitic tidal wave is intolerable.

  28. PaleoAtlantid's Gravatar PaleoAtlantid
    January 7, 2016 - 12:37 pm | Permalink

    This rolling catastrophe couldn’t have happened if the Berlin Wall were still standing and the Warsaw Pact still a credible threat.

    • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
      January 7, 2016 - 5:46 pm | Permalink

      The racial purity of North Korea isn’t so appreciated that there aren’t mines and barbed-wire to stop flight from the Workers’ Paradise.

      Besides, comunism effects an intra-racial selection process, culling those with initiative and integrity and rewarding those with sloth, duplicity and docility. I doubt Kampuchea will recover quickly from its glorious social experiment.

  29. Datqunn Sawyer's Gravatar Datqunn Sawyer
    January 7, 2016 - 11:54 am | Permalink

    Dr MacDonald, Something that has become obvious to me is that the media class target white women. They seem to lack the cunning and foresight to see the disastrous consequences of diversity policy. This is my favorite site and with your evopsych background, I’m surpised there has not been many articles discussing this. Female politicians seem to be doubly disastrous as evidenced by the awful Merkel. Listening to a female pol is just one long tirade of pc platitudes. I can’tagine a female Trump. Female suffrage is the white man’s Achilles heel.

    • Stan's Gravatar Stan
      January 8, 2016 - 2:32 am | Permalink

      Yes, in short females reason intuitively, not logically, indirect threats are more or less out of their frame of reference but show them a picture of some little third world kid crying and they want to mother them. This is because females evolved instincts and skills relevant for motherhood and not for male roles, consequently women are an easy mark for the open borders agenda, it is intuitively appealing to them. Men on the other hand evolved the ability for long term planing which is essential for male roles, i.e., managing territorial conflicts such as warfare with neighboring tribes. This led to the evolution of abstract reasoning skills in men and explains in part why females do so poorly in math, and in the recognition of indirect threats such as third world immigration, relative to males.

      The political answer to attracting women to anti immigration issues is to change the indirect threat into a one which is direct enough to register with women, for example pictures of little American kids who have had a parent murdered by an illegal alien. Trump is on the right track by featuring a young woman recently murdered, and would do even better if he would include more children victims of illegal immigration/ third world immigration in the mix.

      Btw, the study of the evolutionary roots of behavior is commonly referred to as Sociobiology and those interested may goog E.O. Wilson as a good place to start. Unsurprisingly your search will uncover much opposition to the concept of genetic based human behavior from jews, however their objections are political and not based upon the evidence, which is overwhelmingly on the Wilson side.

      • Junghans's Gravatar Junghans
        January 8, 2016 - 6:58 pm | Permalink

        When the innate emotional traits of “females” are discussed, it needs to be explicitly stated that we are talking about White females here, not generic females. Females of other races generally operate on a far different emotional wavelength. That being said, I would basically concur with much of what has been said here about the nature of White females.

    • Passer by's Gravatar Passer by
      January 8, 2016 - 4:52 am | Permalink

      I could discuss that. I believe that there is a connection between feminisation of society and third-worldization of society.

      Men evolved to protect the perimeter against males from other (mainly patriarchal) tribes (chimps do the same). Having women make decisions about the perimeter results in what we see – open borders, multiculture, diversity, “tolerance”.



      Women, for the most part, care about resources and smoothing conflict over. They evolved to fill that role. Stockholm Syndrome is more pronounced in female captives. Women were frequently taken captive by (or in some cases traded to) other groups, and so they evolved to smooth things over with distant groups (whereas their male kinfolk were simply killed)

      So, women tend to vote for resource redistribution and being nice to everybody (including those who aren’t in their group), and for helping everybody in need, regardless of their group (say hello to refugee crisis).

      Women are also more mainstream. They do not like extremes. So you will rarely see them taking political positions where they risk being called a bigot. Women prefer safer and non-confrontational political positions, where society will approve their behavior and pat them on the back.


      For every five men in a far right party you will be lucky to see one woman. You will see lots of women in pro-refugee/pro-immigration groups though.

      Have a look at pro-immigration demonstration (lots of women) http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8c3_1442068850

      and anti-immigration demonstration (very few women) http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a6b_1442695250

      In Scandinavia for example, women vote for the pro-immigration parties, while men vote for the anti-immigration parties. In Sweden, women were only 35 percent of those who voted for the anti-immigration party, the Swedish Democrats party.

      “The only major political party in Norway that has voiced any serious opposition to the madness of Muslim immigration is the rightwing Progress Party. This is a party which receives about two thirds or even 70% male votes. At the opposite end of the scale we have the Socialist Left party, with two thirds or 70% female votes. The parties most critical of the current immigration are typically male parties, while those who praise the Multicultural society are dominated by feminists.”

      You can check this article by Fjordman, where he argues that Swedish feminists, by popularizing victim mongering behavior, quotas/affirmitive action, by supporting the welfare state, and by being against “bigotry” and “hate speech”, created an environment that is particularly well suited for the spread of other parasitic groups who also, like the feminists, behave like victims, demand quotas/special treatment, demand more welfare handouts, and want to silence criticism and free speech.


      When german feminists protested against the recent migrant rape wave in Germany, they tried to change the subject from german vs arab issue into men vs women issue, implying that all men are to blame for what happened in Cologne. It is hard for a feminist to be pro white, because it is very easy to jump from gender equality ideology into racial equality ideology, from anti-sexism to anti-racism, from male privilege to white privilege, from condemning patriarchal opression in the past to condemning colonial opression in the past. Both ideologies claim that they support the opressed weak vs the strong, the opressed victims of men or the opressed victims of white colonizers.

      So not surprisingly, german feminists in Cologne protested both against sexism and against racism, mixing them into one.



      If you need more information about this issue, you can check my posts here.

      • Curmudgeon's Gravatar Curmudgeon
        January 8, 2016 - 10:07 am | Permalink

        “Women, for the most part, care about resources…”
        I could not agree more, and my following comment will loose the attack dogs.
        I have often joked that women do not understand basic physics – 2 objects cannot occupy the same space at the same time. I could apply this jest to 90% of the women I have known in my life, including my mother, wife, daughters, aunts and cousins. Today’s homes are filled with crap, my own included. Enjoyment of shopping is a very female thing. An item reminds them of someone or something, and a purchase is made because it was “cute”. Souvenirs (crap), and sending post cards are important to female travellers, but an afterthought for most males I have met. After all, when going on vacation, who wants to shop as much as sight see?
        I classify all of these as resources. My regard for the females in my life is not diminished by this trait, but I do, at times find it frustrating.
        OK, let the attacks come.

        • Karen T's Gravatar Karen T
          January 8, 2016 - 2:40 pm | Permalink

          You may be right but there are exceptions. In our household it’s an ongoing battle fuelled by my minimalist zen tastes opposed to my husbands tendency to accumulate “things.” Also, I detest shopping, he happily browses while I wait in the car.

      • Stan's Gravatar Stan
        January 8, 2016 - 8:46 pm | Permalink

        Passer by,
        thanks for your great comment and one point you made in the thread you directed me to can’t be made too often in my view;

        “Men are the immune system of sociey. They react against invaders and parasitism, women don’t. If you want to destroy [a] certain group, destroy it’s immune system. Just like HIV destroys an immune system. Then various bacteria moves in and the body dies.”

    • Karen T's Gravatar Karen T
      January 8, 2016 - 8:07 am | Permalink

      Bella Abzug, Susan Brownmiller, Gene Boyer, Phyllis Chester, Andrea Dworkin, Rian Eister, Susan Faludi, Betty Frieden, Shulamith Firestone, Emma Goldman, Lucy Kamisan, Gerda Lerner, Robin Morgan, Annie Meyer, Maud Nathan, Karen Nussbaum, Letty Pogrebin, Geri Palest, Anita Pollitzer, Ernestine Rose, Gloria Steinem, Rose Schneider, Naomi Wolf, and this is merely a sample. Google Jewish Feminists for a much longer list. The White woman is not the thorn in the White mans achilles heel, but another unwitting tool in this all out assault coming from all directions, and if White men persist in indicting his natural allies, mothers, sisters, lovers, they too are unwitting tools.

      • Passer by's Gravatar Passer by
        January 8, 2016 - 12:14 pm | Permalink

        Unfortunately that does’t look to be the case, at least to me. Jewish women are the best feminists, and also dominate North American feminism, but Scandinavian countries are much more feminist than the US. Especially Sweden. And Nordic feminism is indigenous, european feminism, developed by local european women.

        Euro feminism is not simply caused by jews only. There are a lot more jews in the US compared to Norway (2 percent vs 0.03 percent of the population, 6 million vs 1500), yet Norway is more feminist country than the US. In Sweden, there are 20k jews out of 10 million people (0.2 percent vs 2 percent in the US), yet Sweden is much more feminist country than the US.

        What is happening in Sweden and other nordic countries is a european pathology, that can not be explained away by jewish influence only. I will just copy paste several comments, that were very interesting to me, by a swede with nick “Jack Burton” that comments at Zerohedge.

        “And blaming women is not popular. It will not get you a date. But in Europe, women have taken over society in nearly every sense. Men are worse feminists than the women. It is a proven fact the the people most active in Migrant welcoming organizations, feeding stations, mangers of temp. housing, and demonstrating for migrants rights. Most of them are middle age women without any husbands. Watch videos from Europe carefully, you will see hundreds of migrant young men, and it is always the white middle aged woman who is handing them bread, or serving the soup. In the Calais migrant camp it is a few Middle Age French women who keep the migrants fed. They come every day to do what they can for thousands of young single Islamic men.”

        “These women all have college degrees in feminism and social welfare theory. They want migrants as that employs women in the social services. Liberal and leftists women whose jobs are in government and social welfare.”

        “I already posted about the Swedish woman who befriended a group of young male migrants on a Swedish train. They drank together and sang songs and she got to know these new Swedes. Then she was gang rapped by them. So what does she do? She remains reluctant to file charges, do to the fact that “They are refugees and they might have a different culture, and it is hard for them.”

        “Jesus, that is all you need to know about Women in Europe. And notice who is always out front to help migrants and to welcome them. Yes, usually middle age to 60 year old single women. They have nothing, no family, so they adopt migrants as their cause, expecting migrants to love them in return.”

        “I told you it was this bad, but no! It really is worse. In many small towns, the migrants prowl the streets while locals stay home. Letting children, young girls out of the house is now impossible. And guess what? Swedish feminists are fighting hard for Migrants rights, demanding borders stay open and more taxes be put on people. Women is Sweden have most of the political power, they have spoken. “Open borders” “Cancel Swede’s rights to accomodate islamic culture” “rape is the fault of cultural differences”

        I said this before, and got my ass ripped open for it. But here it goes. “If MEN do not take back political power in Europe, away from the women, and institute a defense of Swedish culture, then it is all over”.

        “The stupidity of a raped Swedish woman to not want to get the migrants in trouble because she feels sorry for them. You know where that comes from? Brainwashing leftist tachers in Swedish schools.”

        “The locals are told that these newcomers will boost the economy and improve life by bring their diverse culture to Swedes. Anyone daring to say a word about it is attack by the feminists who call them nazis. This migration is very much a migration of young single black and arab men, 80-90% are 15-35 Male. The major social supporters in Sweden, those who greet migrants, protest for open borders, work in refugee centers, hand out food, and generally work to welcome the migrants are ” Women , single , aged 40-65. Middle aged women. Now if you knew personally who was out thee fighting for more migration, you would know them as loser feminists spinsters. It is actually a joke in Sweden when you see a middle aged woman handing out gifts and foods to 25 year old Black Migrants.”

        • January 8, 2016 - 7:02 pm | Permalink

          I think this is too simple. All Swedish media are dominated by the Jewish Bonnier family, who pump out lies about Swedes all the time. (NB they have an animus against Sweden for being neutral in WW2, instead of warring against the horrid Nazzies, as of course all goyim should do, preferably dying in the process). The central bank money is presumably controlled by Jews; I can’t be bothered to check. Jews love lending money to governments, as they get interest, and also control over the country. The women you speak off aren’t particularly employable, and are offered pseudo-jobs of the sort you describe. In other words, they are paid to work at soup kitchens, shout slogans etc. How many of them train as doctors and move to Africa? How many go to Africa to help? How many give away their money to invaders? How many give up their houses to help? How many offer to train the invaders in useful skills? How many work for them? How many bequeath their assets to invaders? These are genuine markers of altruism. And I’m guessing there are something like zero of them.

        • Karen T's Gravatar Karen T
          January 9, 2016 - 4:27 am | Permalink

          Silly old cows, it would be preferable that they focus their thwarted nurturing instincts on animal welfare, or stay home and dote on their cats.

        • Karen T's Gravatar Karen T
          January 9, 2016 - 7:18 am | Permalink

          The silly old cows would likely be nurturing stray dogs and cats if not for Jewish machinations. You haven’t seen the you tube video where Barbara Spectre, head of Paideia, the Euopean Institute for Jewish Studies in Sweden says “Europe has not yet learned to be multicultural. And I think that we are going to be part of the throes of that transformation which must take place. Europe is not going to be the monolithic societies that they once were in the last century. Jews are going to be at the centre of that. It’s a huge transformation for Europe to make. They are now going into multicultural mode and Jews will be resented because of our leading role.”? Google the Jerusalem Post Jan. 7th, 2014, and read the article Eitrean Migrants resettled from Israel to Sweden. These migrants were paid $3,500 each and flown to Sweden.
          Norways Jewish population may be small but they wield power. Ervin Kohn, President of the Jewish Community in Oslo and the Deputy Director at the Norwegian Center Against Racism said “The Norwegian people have little experience dealing with minorities. So we have a big job to do, bringing minorities to them.”
          To avoid becoming a tool like the silly old cows read some of the excellent articles to your right under Topics, for example Jewish Origins of Multiculturalism in Sweden.

        • Passer by's Gravatar Passer by
          January 9, 2016 - 7:34 am | Permalink


          Sweden has the biggest foreign aid budget in the world as a percentage of gdp, so yes, they and the voters are altruists.
          The voters voted for a government that calls itself a feminist government, and imported more refugees per capita than Germany itself.

          The only anti-immigration party that they have, the Swedish Democrats party, has 25 percent support. 64 percent of those who voted for it were men, 36 percent – women.

          Of course there is jewish influence in Scandinavia (and very few jews, compared to the US). But you should ask yourself: why is it that some countries are more liberal than others, or some countries are more feminist than others?

          I don’t believe that those differences are caused by jews only. The country with the highest jewish concentration/influence, the US, is less liberal than many northern european countries.

          Even if there were no jews around, i bet Nordic countries would still be liberal.

          This is why prof. Kevin MacDonald is talking about pathological altruism as a northern european pathology.

        • Passer by's Gravatar Passer by
          January 9, 2016 - 9:17 am | Permalink

          @Karen T

          I know about this info (Spectre’s comments, the norwegian jew comments, etc.) You underestimated me. Although i rarely comment, i read TOO and other sources since 2012. And i agree with prof. MacDonald’s views. It was actually he who opened my eyes.

          But it appears that you did not read my previous post carefully. You can not explain everything that is happening in the West with jewish influence. There are other factors at play as well. And it is not a coincidence that jews are supporting feminism in western countries, but do not support it in their own country. I will explain again to you what the reason is.

          “The silly old cows would likely be nurturing stray dogs and cats if not for Jewish machinations”

          This statement is not enirely correct. Women do not need jews to tell them to do that. Studies shows that women tend to support everybody in need, while men tend to help only those from their ingroup. They show that women favor outgroups more than men. Thus, we can expect an ingroup with high levels of female influence to be very interested in helping refugees from other groups, and to be more foreigner friendly.

          “Men exhibit a stronger tendency to favor the in-group over the out-group than women”

          “moral identity importance tends to increase donations
          to out-groups, and not to in-groups. How-
          ever, this occurs only for consumers with a feminine gender identity. For consumers with a masculine gender identity, moral identity importance increases donations to the in-group but not the out-group.”

          This is how we can explain the spread of tolerance and the demise of nationalism in western countries. As female influence grew, nationalism became unpopular. The nationalist countries are only those with lower levels of female influence. (Japan, China, Russia, Arab countries, Israel, Eastern Europe, etc.)

          As i mentioned in many of my previous comments, women are less xenophobic than men. Therefore, a society with high levels of female influence will be less xenophobic, and more open to foreigners.

          So this is why jews are supporting feminism – a feminized society will not be a nationalist society, it will be tolerant society, and will be blind for the jews in it’s midst.

          Additionally, the majority of those who are marrying out and joining other cultures are females, 75 percent of converts to Islam in Britain and the US are females,
          as well as the vast majority of whites who mix with blacks. In more male dominated societies, such as Japan, Israel, or western countries in the past, marrying out is/was illegal or is very rare. In the past, when western countires were more patriarchal and xenophobic, anti-miscegenation laws were wide spread. As female influence in the US grew, so did acceptance for race mixing.

          So the problem with feminized society is that it leads to very low levels of xenophobia (dislike for ethnic outgroups), and very high levels of foreigner acceptance, which leads to liberal society, “tolerance”, refugee crisis, foreigh infiltration (the increase in female influence leads to increase in jewish influence, and vice versa, those influences reinforce each other), illegals crisis, lack of ethnic unity/cohesion/solidarity in the feminised group, etc.

          More male influence in society = more xenophobia. More female influence = less xenophobia, which leads to better environment for jews, and other minorities as well.

        • January 9, 2016 - 1:30 pm | Permalink

          Passer by makes three comments.
          [1] Swedish ‘foreign aid’ is large, per capita. Therefore Swedes are altruistic.
          [2] The parties Swedes (notably Swedish women) vote for are (e.g.) pro-immigration. Therefore Swedes are altruistic, esp. women.
          [3] Northern countries are pathologically altruistic.
          [1] Foreign aid is (deliberately) hard to assess. Much goes to Israel; much goes to warlords; much is never properly audited; much has self-regarding motives, eg to promote trade with the giver. Without proper analysis, your remark is as absurd as to expect all internal state spending to be for the benefit of the people in the state.
          [2] You don’t seem to understand how parties are controlled. I’ve spoken to Swedes and the attacks on nationalist parties, of all types, are overwhelming. One signal is the proportion of people who don’t bother to vote; another is invaders who do vote.
          [3] Sweden and Norway have existed for many, many centuries, both together and (recently) apart. If they are ‘pathologically altruistic’, where were the vast numbers of Indians, blacks, Arabs etc imported since say 1000 AD? Plenty of time for ‘pathological altruism’ to work. Not the slightest sign of it. Invasion coincides with Jewish power, notably since 1945.

        • Stan's Gravatar Stan
          January 9, 2016 - 10:38 pm | Permalink

          Passer by,
          yes again, and once more your prior “Men are the immune system of society” bears mention.

          As you point out there is a much higher correlation between a nation’s degree of feminization and pro-3rd world immigration policy than there is between a nation’s degree of judaization and pro-3rd world immigration policy. Likewise, it is a matter of historical record that the West rose to overwhelming dominance of the planet with jews, but without feminization, and that the West’s rapid decline correlates essentially exactly with the post-female suffrage feminization of the West. If the primary cause of such decline is placed upon an increase in jew influence during the post-female suffrage period then the proponent must explain why such increase in jew influence happened to coincide with the post-female suffrage period; and an explanation for that is never offered so far as I can tell.

          As I see it, placing the primary causation of Western decline on jew feminists or jews in general conflicts with the observed facts, and a theory which places the primary causation of Western decline on feminization, and views jew influence as an opportunistic infection secondary to a compromised immune system, is consistent with observed facts. This of course changes nothing with respect to the negative influence of jews upon White civilization, but it does say that the elimination of jew influence would not be the final solution to the problem of White decline; that can come only with the elimination of the feminization of White civilization as well.

        • January 10, 2016 - 12:10 am | Permalink

          @Passer by … With that series of comments, I do believe you’ve nailed it. Kudos!

          A nailing brought about by the great responses of Rerevisionist and Karen T.

        • Passer by's Gravatar Passer by
          January 10, 2016 - 12:59 am | Permalink


          This argument (that foreign aid is a sham) could be made for all other countries. But unless someone comes here and proves that Scandinavian foreign aid is a sham, while the other countries foreign aid is genuine, i will continue to see the fact that Sweden and Norway have the largest foreign aid budgets in the world (as a percentage of gdp), larger than those of all other 200 countries, as a sign that scandinavian countries are more altruistic than other countries.

          Some additional information on this topic:
          According to the Good Country Index, Scandinavian countries are part of top 10 countries in the world.

          “The idea of the Good Country Index is pretty simple: to measure what each country on earth contributes to the common good of humanity, and what it takes away. Using a wide range of data from the U.N. and other international organisations, we’ve given each country a balance-sheet to show at a glance whether it’s a net creditor to mankind, a burden on the planet, or something in between.”


          Nordics the most altruistic area in the world


          Another sign of altruism is immigration policy. While other countries usually import normal, regular immigrants, Sweden concentrated on importing refugees.
          Sweden is number one in Europe and the world for accepted refugees per capita. It took much more refugees per capita compared to the US, Canada, Britain, or Germany.

          Sweden – the OECD’s highest per capita recipient of asylum seekers

          Here you can see a Swedish Deputy Prime Minister crying because they can not take even more refugees. I do not belive that this is a show.

          I posted the information about the anti-immigraion party to show the voting patterns. That pattern is clear everywhere in the West. More men vote for right wing, anti-immigration parties, more women vote for left wing, pro-immigration parties. After women started to vote, this led to major political changes, including the rise of government, liberalism, and the welfare state.
          “Suffrage coincided with immediate increases in state government expenditures and revenue and more liberal voting patterns for federal representatives”

          Here you can see information about Norway:
          “The only major political party in Norway that has voiced any serious opposition to the madness of Muslim immigration is the rightwing Progress Party. This is a party which receives about two thirds or even 70% male votes. At the opposite end of the scale we have the Socialist Left party, with two thirds or 70% female votes. The parties most critical of the current immigration are typically male parties, while those who praise the Multicultural society are dominated by feminists.”


          Another sign of nordic altruism is the support for women in government. Unlike the US, or Britain, in Sweden there are quotas for female ministers and female MPs. The Government ministers are 50 percent male, 50 percent female. Mps in the Parliament are also around 50 percent male, 50 percent female. Nothing like this exists in the US, or Britain, where women are usually 25 percent of all MPs and the minority of Government ministers. Unlike the US or Britain, in Norway and Sweden the defence ministers are female as well.

          For northern european altruism, you can see MacDonald’s view on it:

          “Europeans were less subjected to between-group natural selection than Jews and other Middle Eastern populations. This was originally proposed by Fritz Lenz, who suggested that, because of the harsh environment of the Ice Age, the Nordic peoples evolved in small groups and have a tendency toward social isolation rather than cohesive groups. This perspective would not imply that Northern Europeans lack collectivist mechanisms for group competition, but only that these mechanisms are relatively less elaborated and/or require a higher level of group conflict to trigger their expression.
          In the case of Northwest Europe this tendency quickly gave rise long before the industrial revolution to the unique Western European “simple household” type.”
          “This suggests the fascinating possibility that the key for a group intending to turn Europeans against themselves is to trigger their strong tendency toward altruistic punishment by convincing them of the evil of their own people.
          The best strategy for a collectivist group like the Jews for destroying Europeans therefore is to convince the Europeans of their own moral bankruptcy. A major theme of CofC is that this is exactly what Jewish intellectual movements have done.”

          I also have another theory why liberalism exploded after the 50-s. It is because contraception became widely available. This caused women to stop having 4 kids, to have 1.5 (on average) instead, and to enter politics and the labor force en masse. As female influence increased rapidly since the 50-s, so did liberalism and tolerance for foreigners. As females were freed from the burden of multiple kids, and got more free time, society became much more liberal. I do not think that it is a coincidence that non-white immigration was allowed in the 60-s. Obviously jewish influence caused that too. But my view is that the increase in female influence leads to increase in jewish influence, and vice versa, and that those influences reinforce each other.

        • Karen T's Gravatar Karen T
          January 10, 2016 - 6:26 am | Permalink

          @Passerby “Studies show that women tend to support everybody in need” I thought that was implied in my remark about nurturing homeless dogs and cats (a nobler pursuit in my opinion than nurturing migrants)
          You originally posted “What is happening in Sweden and other Nordic countries is a European pathology that can not be explained away by jewish influence alone.” Ah, but it can be. Media and Education are under jewish control. Yad Vashem conducts seminars for Swedish teachers and holocaust education is mandatory for students grades 7 to 9. The multi ‘cult’ indoctrination is imprinted onto their pristine hard drives before they are capable of critical thinking.
          In your subsequent post you said “So this is why jews are supporting feminism, a feminized society will not be a nationalist society and will be blind to the jews in its midst.” Exactly! The point I was attemping to make, and I’m pleased at your term “feminized society” as the indoctrination is aimed at boys and girls. Boys are naturally more difficult to control so Ritalin is often used to cut down high spirited boys.
          I disagree with the concept “pathological altruism” when it’s used as a blanket condemnation or infers an inherent weakness in Whites. White Gentiles (Gentle?) are highly evolved and empathy is part of that package, unfortunately this empathy has been weaponized and turned against us. Churchill, manipulated depressive and sell-out, when sober, occasionally came out with some gems. “This movement among the Jews is not new….this world wide conspiracy for the ovethrow of Civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality has been steadily growing.” Instead of laying blame on the puppets as too many men do, blame should be laid on the puppeteers.

        • Karen T's Gravatar Karen T
          January 10, 2016 - 12:33 pm | Permalink

          @Passerby, my comment on the “silly old cows” should be taken in context. It was not meant to be especially degading of these women, but to point out a personality type. D. H. Lawrence writing about his relationship with a female cow, Susan, described a cowy passivity and cowy peace. The pig unlike the cow, has a high intelligence exemplified in Arnold in the Green Acres series. I eat neither beef or pork.

        • Passer by's Gravatar Passer by
          January 11, 2016 - 2:48 am | Permalink

          @Karen T

          “my comment on the “silly old cows” should be taken in context. It was not meant to be especially degading”.

          It was ok comment for me. Personally i get angry when i see women like that. I concentrated on this comment for other reasons (see below).

          What you said is that if not for Jewish machinations, those women would likely be nurturing stray dogs and cats. For me, this implies that jews caused women to try to help refugees, and women woudn’t do that if not for jewish propaganda, and will be helping dogs and cats instead.

          I said that this is not entirely correct, because women do not need jews to tell them to do that. Women will help refugees on their own. Why? Because:

          1. Studies show that women are more friendly towards foreigners/people who are not in their group.
          2. They show that women are more willing to donate to foreigners in need (women are more altruistic towards foreigners/refugees in need). It follows that a country with lots of female influence should be more altruistic towards foreigners.
          3. They show that women are more egalitarian than men. (Definition of egalitarian: Someone who believes in the equality of all people, especially in political, economic, or social life, and advocates for the removal of inequalities among people).
          4. They show that women are less conservative, less “racist”, and less punitive than men.

          “You originally posted “What is happening in Sweden and other Nordic countries is a European pathology that can not be explained away by jewish influence alone.” Ah, but it can be.”

          Well, i do not believe that jews decided to make Northern Europe more liberal than Southern Europe, or that it was jews who made Sweden and Norway more liberal than the US. Cultural differences between the different countries can not be explained by jewish influence only. As i already mentioned, the country with the highest jewish concentration/influence, the US, is less liberal and less egalitarian than many northern european countries.

          Scandinavia is currently the most egalitarian area in the world. It strives for equality – income equality, gender equality, etc. There are major cultural differences between the Nordic countries and the US. In the US, capitalism is King, and income inequality is very high. On the other hand, Scandinavia is the area of the world with the lowest income inequality, and with the lowest gender inequality. It is the area of the world with the largest foreign aid budgets (as a percentage of gdp). Scandinavia is in top ten of the Good Country index. Sweden and Norway took more refugees per capita than many other countries that have more jewish influence, such as Britain, Canada, or the US. Sweden is number one in the world for imported refugees per capita, it beats everyone else.

          Sweden is a good example of a feminized society. It is the country with the highest level of female influence in the world. So it strives for equality for all, it is more altruistic, and it is more friendly towards foreigners. Just the way women are.

          So i think that those differences, some of them major differences, are not simply caused by jews only, but by many other factors as well, such as cultural differences, religious differences (Catholic vs Protestant, Calvinist vs Lutheran), genetic differences, the level of female influence (females are more altruistic towards foreigners), etc. So it is a combination of factors – jewish influence, other influences, genetics, etc.

          “I disagree with the concept “pathological altruism” when it’s used as a blanket condemnation or infers an inherent weakness in Whites. White Gentiles (Gentle?) are highly evolved and empathy is part of that package, unfortunately this empathy has been weaponized and turned against us.”

          When the organism has an infection, it is not only the infection that is to blame. It is the weak immune system as well.

          I don’t think that there is inherent weakness in “all Whites”. People in Southern Europe, and especially those in Easten Europe for example, are less altruistic than those from Northern Europe. Unlike westerners, it is very hard to make an eastern european to feel guilty for something. The “White Guilt” thing is mostly a western thing.

          “Instead of laying blame on the puppets as too many men do, blame should be laid on the puppeteers.”

          I agree with the idea that white people should be united, and shoudn’t fight each other, and should look for the jews in their midst. But i also can not overlook human differences between men and women. I understand that probably you don’t like it, but this is what the data shows: a society with high levels of female influence is more vulnerable society, more vulnerable to jews, and more vulnerable to other groups/minorities as well.

        • Passer by's Gravatar Passer by
          January 11, 2016 - 3:20 am | Permalink


          Good comment, that’s close to how i see things as well.

        • Sgt. Pepper's Gravatar Sgt. Pepper
          January 11, 2016 - 5:45 pm | Permalink


          Sweden and Norway have existed for many, many centuries, both together and (recently) apart. If they are ‘pathologically altruistic’, where were the vast numbers of Indians, blacks, Arabs etc imported since say 1000 AD? Plenty of time for ‘pathological altruism’ to work. Not the slightest sign of it.

          Modern transportation is one of a number of “pre-conditions” for mass migration (I think FKA Max was saying the same thing.) Without modern transportation (cars, trains, boats)— the immigrants would have had to walk all the way from Syria to Sweden.

          Notwithstanding all of the Jew’s thirst, prior to modern transportation the mass immigration we witness today would simply have been impossible.

          The immigration crisis is a “perfect storm” of a number of factors, the two main factors being modern transportation and modern communications. (FKA Max also mentioned the population explosion as yet another factor.)

          Invasion coincides with Jewish power, notably since 1945.

          Yes, but it also coincides with major technological change in transportation and communication.

          There are three critical factors for mass immigration:

          1) modern transportation
          2) modern communications
          3) a psychological predisposition to idealism that whites have due to their evolutionary history

          We’ve always had (3). (1) and (2) are more recent.

          Without (1), there is no effective way for millions of non-whites to reach europe
          Without (2), there is no centralized media for the Jews to dominate and promote a form of “pro-Jewish” idealism.

          (And speaking of Jewish power, it is the centralized nature of modern communications which has facilitated the rise of Jewish power. It is the major reason why the Jews have a level of power today that they *never* had before.)

        • Karen T's Gravatar Karen T
          January 12, 2016 - 11:55 am | Permalink

          @ Passerby
          Did you actually read my Jan 10th, 6:26 a.m. post? Rather than accuse you of deception by twisting my remarks, I’ll presume obtuseness and continue.
          I did not say that “jews caused women to help refugees”. I conclusively proved that jews created the refugee, or to use a more honest word, migrant, situation, and nowhere did I claim that “jews told them to do that”. However, being pioneers in the science of psychology, they would have expected it, which brings us to your ‘revelation’ that women are more trusting, friendlier and altruistic than men. I should certainly hope so! What kind of mothers would we make if we weren’t? Would our men still love us if we became hard, distrustful and mean-spirited?
          You say that jews didn’t decide to make Northern Europe more liberal than Southern Europe. Actually, they decided to destroy its integrity and strength any way possible and liberalism was the path of least resistance. The jews haven’t forgotten the threat that Northern Europe posed to their hegemony 70 years ago and they don’t turn the other cheek, forgive and forget, or risk a repeat threat. The U.S is less liberal and egalitarian than northern Europe but being Israels proxy war machine, feminization wouldn’t suit jewrys purpose…got to keep up that fighting spirit. But rest assured, when eretz Israel is a fait accompli the U.S. can go to hell, and the slide into that kingdom has already begun.
          I agreed that Sweden was a feminized society in my 6:26 post and gave you the reasons why, and while a womens place isn’t necessarily barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, it certainly isn’t in high positions of power either. But we both know that if any of these highly placed women dares bite the kosher hand that placed her on the throne, she’ll be knocked off so fast and hard she’ll wish she was in the kitchen.
          “The weak immune system” you blame I addressed in the 6:26 post “multi ‘cult’ indoctrination is embedded onto these childrens pristine hard drives”…
          In closing, I never claimed that there were no differences between men and women. For you to say that “I probably don’t like it” rather ticks me off, like having someone force a bitter drink down your throat. My reference to D.H. Lawrences’ cow Susan and the smart pig Arnold was an attempt at humor, sorry you have none. Now a bitter drink for you – all the women I have known were in love with the Michael Corleone character, and all of our hearts were broken when Mickey Rourke gave acting.

      • Passer by's Gravatar Passer by
        January 13, 2016 - 8:23 am | Permalink

        @Karen T

        “I did not say that “jews caused women to help refugees”. I conclusively proved that jews created the refugee, or to use a more honest word, migrant, situation, and nowhere did I claim that “jews told them to do that”.”

        I did not say that you said that, i said “What you said is that if not for Jewish machinations, those women would likely be nurturing stray dogs and cats. For me, this implies that jews caused women to try to help refugees, and women woudn’t do that if not for jewish propaganda, and will be helping dogs and cats instead. ”

        And i proved to you that women do not need jews in order to start helping refugees, using several studies, including a study that shows that women are more likely to donate to people who are not from their own group.

        “I conclusively proved that jews created the refugee, or to use a more honest word, migrant, situation”

        I do not see proof. I see this: “ad Vashem conducts seminars for Swedish teachers and holocaust education is mandatory for students grades 7 to 9. The multi ‘cult’ indoctrination is imprinted onto their pristine hard drives before they are capable of critical thinking.”

        First of all, do you have information that this is happening in Norway and Denmark too? Second, why would the parents, who were initially not brainwashed, agree to such things and not correct the thinking of their kids? Maybe their social immune system was weak, as i proposed? Third, your opinion for the school brainwashing is too high. In my country, the former communist authority used far more powerful brainwashing than anything you have seen in the west, in order to brainwash the local muslim minority into atheism and assimilation. Yet that did not work and they never assimilated. They actually rebelled. This brings us to the immune system issue. Why is it that it is so easy to make north-western whites feel guilty, but it is hard to make other groups feel guilty? Maybe because their (north-westerm whites) ethnic immune system is weak?

        “However, being pioneers in the science of psychology, they would have expected it, which brings us to your ‘revelation’ that women are more trusting, friendlier and altruistic than men.

        For some people in this discussion the information that i posted was useful, and they thanked me in their posts. I’m sure you learned new things too.

        “I should certainly hope so! What kind of mothers would we make if we weren’t? Would our men still love us if we became hard, distrustful and mean-spirited?”
        I certainly wouldn’t love women like that. The problem here is that being more trusting, more foreigner friendly, and more altruistic (including more altruistic towards foreigners), is not always a good thing. Sometimes it is a good thing, and sometimes it isn’t. In order to help others, one must have brain, otherwise there is a risk of harming yourself and harming others. Being more accepting of foreigners has nothing to do with motherhood.

        “The U.S is less liberal and egalitarian than northern Europe but being Israels proxy war machine, feminization wouldn’t suit jewrys purpose”

        This is possible, but i’m not sure about that. There are 2 possibilities.
        Either jews specifically wanted the US to be less liberal than NE, (yet jews continue to push for more liberalism in the US, which is a contradiction), or there are also cultural and religious differences causing this. Lutheran christianity, the Scandinavian christianity, for example is more liberal that the protestant denominations in the US. There are female bishops in the official Church of Sweden since the 60s.

        “You say that jews didn’t decide to make Northern Europe more liberal than Southern Europe. Actually, they decided to destroy its integrity and strength any way possible and liberalism was the path of least resistance. The jews haven’t forgotten the threat that Northern Europe posed to their hegemony 70 years ago and they don’t turn the other cheek, forgive and forget, or risk a repeat threat. ”

        I can not agree with that. What kind of threat are Norway, Sweden and Denmark? They were not a real threat to anyone in the last 300 years, and are political and military pygmies. Those are countries with very small populations. 5 million in Denmark, 10 million in Sweden, and 5 million in Norway. Sweden did not join Germany in WW2, while Norway and Denmark joined the Allies. Denmark even saved jews. Why would they be the biggest threat? Why would jews want exactly those small (population wise) countries to be the most liberal and egalitarian countries in the world?

        I’m sorry, but this is too simplistic explanation for me. The point remains that they are more liberal and egalitarian than anyone else, including all other european countries, and i don’t think that this is caused by jews only, or that jews specifically decided to make them to be more liberal and egalitarian than anyone else. As i said, there are also cultural differences at play, religious differences, (protestant countries usually are more liberal that catholic countries), genetic differences –

        (“Europeans were less subjected to between-group natural selection than Jews and other Middle Eastern populations. This was originally proposed by Fritz Lenz, who suggested that, because of the harsh environment of the Ice Age, the Nordic peoples evolved in small groups and have a tendency toward social isolation rather than cohesive groups. This perspective would not imply that Northern Europeans lack collectivist mechanisms for group competition, but only that these mechanisms are relatively less elaborated and/or require a higher level of group conflict to trigger their expression.”)


        as well them having more female influence, compared to other countries. Since female influence in very high in the Nordic countries, it should lead to more refugee friendly and more altruistic behavior.

        Personally i do not agree with the idea that “jews cause everything”, etc. For me this is too simplistic. It is an easy answer, and i don’t like easy answers. The world is a complex place, with many influences at play, not just jewish influence. For example i never claimed that the rise of female influence in the West caused all of it’s problems. Yet it is very clear to me that there is fusion between jewish influence and female influence, and that they reinforce each other. It is very clear that the rise of female influence and the rise of jewish influence in the West coincided, and that they corelate with each other.

        “while a womens place isn’t necessarily barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, it certainly isn’t in high positions of power either”

        One of the ways to fix this is marriage. Married women tend to vote for the right, unmarried women – for the left. The majority of unmarried white women in the US voted for Obama, while the majority of married white women voted against Obama.
        I suspect the high marriage rate is one of the reasons why Israel or Japan are less liberal and more nationalist than the US. I guess jews know what is good for them.
        Children born to unmarried women:
        USA – 40%
        Israel 3%
        Japan 3%
        Actually, now that i think of it, the implosion of marriage in the West is one of reasons why the West is more liberal than the rest of the world. Unmarried women are more likely to vote liberal/left.

        “In closing, I never claimed that there were no differences between men and women.”

        And since “Men exhibit a stronger tendency to favor the in-group over the out-group than women”

        and women are less xenophobic than men, according to numerous studies, such as this one
        “The evolutionary psychological perspective implies
        that women should be far less resistant to alien rule than men, because they have the option of marrying into the conquering group.”

        then a society with high levels of female influence will be more vulnerable to jews, to other minorities, to race mixing, to illegals (women are less likely to support deportation of illegals)
        to refugees, and to all other types of foreign infiltration.

        “For you to say that “I probably don’t like it” rather ticks me off, like having someone force a bitter drink down your throat.”

        Plenty of women think they always know what’s best.
        According to the data that i posted, this is not the case. There are deficiencies in female behavior, that are going to cause negative consequences for society, if they are not addressed. The way to address them is more male influence in society, more married people, etc. Of course there are male deficiencies as well (such being too agressive and too xenophobic, which could cause unnecessary wars). But the current problem in the West is that people are not aggressive and xenophobic enough, which is caused by too much female influence. I thought that showing you some of the female deficiencies could make you feel bad, but that in itself was not my aim. It could be like bitter medicine, but i think that knowing your potential (female) deficiencies will only make you stronger, which will be good for you, in the end.

        “My reference to D.H. Lawrences’ cow Susan and the smart pig Arnold was an attempt at humor, sorry you have none. Now a bitter drink for you – all the women I have known were in love with the Michael Corleone character, and all of our hearts were broken when Mickey Rourke gave acting.”

        I’m not from the anglo sphere so i’m not aware of many of your local anglo books, proverbs, tv shows, cultural specifics, etc. So i wasn’t aware of any deep meaning in what you said. I know that it would have been better if i understood everything. That’s one of the risks when one communicates with people who are from another country, culture, etc. Personally i wouldn’t expect you to be aware of my country’s literature, cultural specifics, proverbs, tv shows, actors, social memes, etc.

        So the only funny thing i will say here is that i will be unable to drink your bitter drink, because i don’t have any idea what you are talking about.

  30. Sandman's Gravatar Sandman
    January 7, 2016 - 11:28 am | Permalink

    So many good points in Dr. Salter’s work and this article. We should remember that it really is a relatively small number of elites that are holding the multicultural police state together. Sure, there are some genuine emotional cripples who like this type of humiliation but they aren’t the majority. I have wondered how new arrivals to a country like Germany become voters. Fill out a card and wait for permission? Pass a basic kind of test? Boggles the mind that anybody thinks this is acceptable.

Comments are closed.