Obey Your Ethnic Masters: A Simple Message for Stale Pale Folk

Tobias Langdon


I’ve always been fascinated by the concept of infallibility and the promise of certain knowledge. Singer Neil Young keeps on searching for a heart of gold. I keep on searching for certainty. Or rather: I search for more of it, because there is an infallible system of certain knowledge. It’s called mathematics and I think it’s mankind’s greatest intellectual achievement. Among much else, mathematicians can say with absolute certainty that prime numbers never run out and that we can never square a circle with straight-edge and compass.

The Infallible Tyrant

But here’s a curious thing: mathematicians don’t claim infallibility. Except that it’s not curious. Mathematicians don’t need to claim it: they have an objective way to prove their ideas. “Infallibility” is an ideological claim, an assertion of power and dominance (actual or desired), not something that a true system of knowledge ever needs to wield. As Bertrand Russell pointed out: “Persecution is used in theology, not in arithmetic, because in arithmetic there is knowledge, but in theology there is only opinion.”

What’s true of theology is also true of politics. Here is Leszek Kołakowski, the great Polish philosopher and intellectual historian, in Main Currents of Marxism (1978):

A particularly blatant example of aggressive Stalinism was the ideological invasion of the natural sciences. … [I]f we take a panoramic view of the history of those years we may perceive a certain gradation of ideological pressure, corresponding roughly to the hierarchy of the sciences established by Comte and Engels. Pressure was almost zero in mathematics, fairly strong in cosmology and physics, stronger still in the biological sciences, and all-powerful in the social and human sciences. (Op. cit., Vol. III, “The Breakdown,” ch. 4, “The Crystallization of Marxism-Leninism after the Second World War,” pp. 131 and 139)

Stalinism was aggressive because it claimed infallibility, as Kołokowski notes: “When the party is identified with the state and the apparatus of power, and when it achieves perfect unity in the shape of a one-man tyranny, doctrine becomes a matter of state and the tyrant is proclaimed infallible. … Lenin had always been right [and] the Bolshevik party was and had always been infallible” (Op. cit., pp. 4 and 93). Marxism is, in effect, the marriage of politics and religion, mixing the psychology of the latter with the secular concerns of the former. Where Christianity has an infallible Magisterium or an infallible pope, Marxism has an infallible dialectic and a succession of infallible leaders.

Advertisement - Time to SUBSCRIBE now!

Odium and aggression

And where Christianity has apostates and heretics, Marxism has wreckers and ideological deviants. As I pointed out in “Comrades and Cannibals,” the concept of odium theologicum, or “hatred among theologians,” also applies to feuding Marxists. When there is no objective means of establishing truth, psychological intensity and will-to-power become essential parts of ideological combat. This helps explain why Marxism has been dominated by aggressive and assertive minorities with grudges against the majority: Marx, Trotsky, Zinoviev and many others were Jewish, Lenin had Mongol and Jewish ancestry, Stalin was Georgian, Dzerzhinsky was Polish, and so on.

To win power, these minority Marxists have to direct their aggression outward and avoid internal feuds as much as possible. Steve Sailer points out that the “coalition of the fringes” in American politics is held together by the “KKKrazy Glue” of hatred for straight White males. Back in 2012, the glue was used in a dispute at Bard College, in upstate New York. An anonymous cultural Marxist argued that Noah Steadman, a “self-proclaimed White Supremacist,” had to be silenced because his opinions were “in direct confrontation with the very existence” of vulnerable minorities. On behalf of those minorities, the Marxist was claiming infallibility and the right to crush all dissent:

We refuse to passively accept the continuation of a violent history of systemic inequality which attempts to control our interpretations of freedom, inequality, and being. Moreover, we assert our agency to create a society that allows us to participate in speech that is genuinely free. The attitude I described above, the attitude of conciliatory apologetics, free speech, tolerance, and civility, is precisely what myself and my classmates are fighting against. It assumes that words and feelings are expressed in a historical void of objective universalism, that all speakers enter conversations on equal footing, and that words have no substance other than the ideas and concrete objects they signify. What students like myself have been arguing for the last two months is that when a person coming from a place of innumerable privileges publicly questions diversity on our campus, they are bringing the full weight of systemic oppression and violence hundreds of years old to bear on each and every other student. We have been arguing that Noah’s ability and “right” to express his opinions is in direct confrontation with the very existence of every Black, Asian, Hispanic, Native American, Indigenous, Gay, Lesbian, Female, Transgendered, Disabled, Queer, Jewish, Muslim, non-White, non-Christian, non-Male, non-Heterosexual, non-Cisgendered, person in our community. (Here, November 2012)

School for Slavery

These words may well have been written by a Jewish student, given that there’s a reference to “Rosh Hashanah,” for example, and the tone reminds me of a Jewish troll called Joshua Goldberg, who passed himself off variously as an Islamist, a member of the Ku Klux Klan, and a zero-tolerance SJW. Perhaps Goldberg himself wrote the attack on Steadman as a parody, but there’s no doubt that it reflects the ideas of very many people right across the West. There’s been a recent example at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), a university affiliated with the University of London (which officially claims to be “synonymous with intellectual inquiry and achievement”), where cultural Marxists in the Student Union have issued an infallible report about “racism” and the under-achievement of “BME undergraduates.” Here’s a small sample of its verbiage:

The BME Attainment Gap project was conducted as studies show that there has been a gap between the degree attainment of white and BME (Black and Minority Ethnic) undergraduates at SOAS [the School of Oriental and African Studies], with a greater proportion of white students attaining either a 2:1 or first class degree. These gaps cannot be attributed to differences between students at entry at SOAS, thus suggesting factors within SOAS contributing to this finding. The gap is not attributable to a deficit in BME students: any intervention must target institutional factors and not BME students themselves. …

There is a clear need to raise awareness of the forms that racism by both staff and students take on campus and in the classroom, and to give all staff and students the skills to intervene in problematic behaviour, and to react constructively to being ‘called out’.

Recommendation: Design a campaign and deliver to raise awareness of racism by both staff and students on campus and in the classroom. It should include:

  • How to recognise racism in speech and behaviour (with examples of the forms it may take);

  • A clear message that behaviours and comments are racist because of their impact, not their intention;

  • How to react constructively to being ‘called out’ for racism, by listening, being non-defensive, and being committed to learning and changing. (Degrees of Racism: Attainment Gap Report Summary, December 2016)

The report is as fascinating in its psychopathology as it is disturbing in its totalitarianism. It proclaims ex cathedra that there can be no explanation for non-White “under-achievement” but White racism and that Whites must atone for their wicked behaviour. Note these phrases:

behaviours and comments are racist because of their impact, not their intention … react constructively to being ‘called out’ … by being non-defensive, and being committed to learning and changing (Degrees of Racism)

An infallible authority does not find it “constructive” when its claims are challenged or denied. The report demands that Whites react to a charge of “racism” by accepting it without question and “committing” themselves to “learning and changing.” Whites must be “non-defensive,” i.e. completely submissive, because there is no defence against a charge of racism.

Emotions are infallible

And what infallible system of knowledge allows oppressed minorities to identify racism? Simple: they identify racism by its “impact,” i.e. by its effect on their subjective emotions. If non-Whites feel that they have been treated or spoken to in a racist way, no further evidence is needed. Emotions are an infallible guide to truth. When an ethnic oracle speaks, White offenders must submit without question.

The message of the report is simple: “Obey your Ethnic Masters, stale pale males and females!” The people who wrote it clearly want to impose a form of ideological slavery in which minorities have complete mastery over Whites. Indeed, it’s more than ideological slavery, because the minorities also want money and resources. The outcome of this political extortion can be seen in South Africa and Zimbabwe, where oppressed Blacks demanded equality, took over well-run White institutions, and began to destroy them.

Poisoned politics

But where does the ideology of minority supremacism come from? Many bigots and anti-Semites in the Alt Right would claim that it is fundamentally a Jewish invention. But it’s not just the Alt Right that make this claim:

Britain’s top rabbi warns against multiculturalism …

Multiculturalism promotes segregation, stifles free speech and threatens liberal democracy, Britain’s top Jewish official warned in extracts from his book published Saturday.

Jonathan Sacks, Britain’s [former] chief rabbi, defined multiculturalism as an attempt to affirm Britain’s diverse communities and make ethnic and religious minorities more appreciated and respected. But in his book, The Home We Build Together: Recreating Society, he said the movement had run its course.

“Multiculturalism has led not to integration but to segregation,” Sacks wrote in his book, an extract of which was published in the Times of London. “Liberal democracy is in danger,” Sacks said, adding later: “The politics of freedom risks descending into the politics of fear.”

Sacks said Britain’s politics had been poisoned by the rise of identity politics, as minorities and aggrieved groups jockeyed first for rights, then for special treatment. The process, he said, began with Jews, before being taken up by blacks, women and gays. He said the effect had been “inexorably divisive.”

“A culture of victimhood sets group against group, each claiming that its pain, injury, oppression, humiliation is greater than that of others,” he said. (Britain’s top rabbi warns against multiculturalism, iSteve, 20th October, 2007)

Jonathan Sacks also thinks that minority supremacism is a Jewish invention. If so, it has begun to behave like a Jewish legend known as the Golem, a monster created to serve Jewish ends that turns on its creators. Here’s something else from the School of Oriental and African Studies in London:

Appalling treatment of Jewish students at SOAS Students Union

On Tuesday night, Jewish students at SOAS were treated differently from other minorities. They were told that unlike every other minority group, they are not allowed to define what constitutes their own antisemitism. They were also told that Zionists were not welcome on their campus.

A motion called ‘Jewish Equality Act’ was debated at SOAS Students’ Union’s Union General Meeting on Tuesday. The motion aimed to create processes to make campus life more accessible for Jewish students. This included ensuring that there were prayer spaces for all students of faith, provision of kosher food, and not scheduling events on Jewish holidays or the Sabbath.

As part of the debate of the motion, the following line was removed after debate:

“Jewish students should be given the right to self-determination and be able to define what constitutes hatred against their group like all other minority groups”

This was, once again, a room full of students who do not identify as Jewish, explaining to Jewish students how to define their own oppression. This is in contrast to the way that other forms of oppression are defined, as per the Macpherson principle [discussed below], allowing the victim to define their own oppression.

The proposer of the motion and J-Soc President, Avrahum Sanger, whose experiences were recently covered in the [London] Evening Standard was told that he was wrong and that his experiences of discrimination were not true. This is reflective of many Jewish students in the past year not being able to define their own experiences or oppression, unlike other minority groups.

… In light of Tuesday night’s events, proposer of the motion and SOAS Jewish Society President Avrahum Sanger wrote a blog that you can read here. Josh Nagli, UJS [Union of Jewish Students] Campaigns Director added:

“The comments made during the SOAS Union General Meeting were outrageous. Not only were Jewish students told that they did not have the right to define their own oppression, but they also heard that Zionists are not welcome in their Students’ Union. These disgraceful comments are a stark reminder of the discrimination and intolerance many Jewish students at SOAS have faced in recent years.

“Time and again, Jewish students are being told what constitutes antisemitism. Whereas Students’ Unions have regularly applied the Macpherson principle to other minority groups, allowing them to define their own oppression, it seems that once again we are seeing one rule for Jewish students and another for everyone else.” … (Appalling treatment of Jewish students at SOAS Students Union, Union of Jewish Students, 26th January 2017)

The Golem runs rogue

You can see there that minority supremacism, as manufactured by Jews for their own advantage, has been turned on its creators. The “Macpherson principle,” named from Lord Macpherson’s report into the martyrdom of the Black teenager Stephen Lawrence, states that racism is in the eye of the beholder. That’s why minority groups are able to “define their own oppression”: if they think they are oppressed, that is exactly what they are.

The White majority is not, of course, allowed to “define” anything in response. Whites cannot claim innocence, plead mitigation or appeal to any objective facts or reasoning: they are guilty as charged and must simply submit. I’d suggest that the “Macpherson principle” is a dangerous one, liable to be abused by fallible and selfish human beings. But I’m a stale pale male and of course I would say that. Cultural Marxism, by contrast, teaches that oppressed groups slough off human imperfection and become both infallible in judgment and saintly in intention.

The trouble comes when the infallible judgments of the oppressed contradict each other. Jews like Avrahum Sanger and Josh Nagli at SOAS are perfectly happy for Muslims and other non-Whites to use minority supremacism and the “Macpherson principle” as weapons against the White majority in Britain. Alas, they have discovered that non-Whites want to use those same weapons against Jews: the Golem has turned on its creators. As a Jewish woman said after being pelted by Bangladeshi Muslims with eggs and vegetables at a memorial service in London: “This is so wrong. We should be on the same side.”

Another interesting year

The “same side” is, of course, the side opposing the White and historically Christian majority in Britain. But Muslims don’t want to be on the same side as Jews. The coalition of the fringes is unravelling even as formerly individualist Whites begin to recognize that they must unite against their self-declared enemies. The hatred, arrogance and self-righteousness of cultural Marxists and minority supremacists are on open display everywhere from the Berkeley campus in California to anti-Trump protests in Europe.

Emotions and lies are potent political forces, but Marxists can only claim infallibility, not achieve it. Reality is not controlled by words or reversed by censorship. The White Tribe is rising, not submitting, and 2017 looks set to be an even more interesting year than 2016.

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

24 Comments to "Obey Your Ethnic Masters: A Simple Message for Stale Pale Folk"

  1. Maple Curtain's Gravatar Maple Curtain
    February 19, 2017 - 9:11 pm | Permalink

    Unfortunately for the Jews and their pets, once you have categorically labelled all whites as ‘offenders whom you hate and wish to destroy,’ you have given whites both permission and incentive to ignore the multiculti twaddle peddled by (((TPTB))) and to fight back. The whirlwind is coming – maybe too late for me and those of my generation, but it is coming. As the Left turns to open and more targeted persecution of white ‘wrong-thinkers,’ more and more young whites are realizing that there is nothing left to do but fight for their own future. As Brimelow said, there will be blood, that is certain.

    • Paul Harvey's Gravatar Paul Harvey
      February 23, 2017 - 2:30 pm | Permalink

      It seems to me very “cuck” to pretend that Jews, Muslims, and blacks are all serious threats to the culture of white America. Jews call the shots and pay the bills. The other groups are their chess pieces.

  2. Junghans's Gravatar Junghans
    February 15, 2017 - 3:32 pm | Permalink

    A dusky, Jewish instigated Golem run wild, and off the rails, is really not surprising. The bestial, dark hordes of Judah turning on their enablers? This is something that any race wise person should easily recognize as the upshot of duplicitous Jewish supremacy. This anti-White turn of events is simply known as poetic justice.

  3. Professor X's Gravatar Professor X
    February 15, 2017 - 2:55 pm | Permalink

    Sadly, the claim that mathematics is the only road to certainty, is certainly false. This was shown by the logico-semantical paradoxes, and by new paradoxes discussed by paraconsistent logicians. It is likely that Godel’s theorem leads to an inconsistency, that the undecidable proposition G is both provable and not provable. Chinese logicians in 2008 presented a series of papers outlining inconsistencies in ZF set theory, and all infinitary systems. Abraham Robinson himself is on record as doubting the soundness of non-finite systems, such as the natural numbers, even though he created non-standard analysis. There is a big world outside, but Alt Right types are weak on the super-hard sciences.

    • Amateur Y's Gravatar Amateur Y
      February 16, 2017 - 1:42 am | Permalink

      Mathematics isn’t omnipotent, but some proofs are certain. Prime numbers are never-ending; the square root of 2 cannot exactly equal a ratio of two integers; pi and e are transcendental; etc. And if “the claim that mathematics is the only road to certainty, is certainly false,” what system are you using to claim that it’s “certainly false”?

    • Logician's Gravatar Logician
      February 17, 2017 - 5:12 pm | Permalink

      You don’t know what you’re talking about. They’re called the incompleteness theorems, rather than the inconsistency theorems, because it is generally believed that PA and ZF are consistent–which implies they are incomplete. If these theories were inconsistent, then every mathematical statement and its negation would be provable from the axioms. The negation of a theorem has never been proven, so the axioms are almost certainly consistent. And the inconsistencies of paraconsistent logics have no bearing on the consistency of PA and ZF, which are formulated in classical logic.

      • Paul Harrison's Gravatar Paul Harrison
        February 23, 2017 - 2:20 pm | Permalink

        So there are infinitely many mathematical statements that can be proved and whose negations cannot be proved, so we have certainty after all! The claim was not that all math is certain but that only math is certain, eh?

    • John's Gravatar John
      February 19, 2017 - 9:57 am | Permalink

      Professor X, I have a question for you. If you have two countries A and B, and the people in country A have an average height of, say, 5 feet and the people in country B have an average height of 6 feet, what happens to the average height of country B when you let in large numbers of people from country A?

  4. Charlemagne Martel's Gravatar Charlemagne Martel
    February 14, 2017 - 9:10 pm | Permalink

    If the maddened Golem and the intended Golem’s victim were to turn on the Golem’s creator at once, wouldn’t that be poetic justice?

  5. Walter L's Gravatar Walter L
    February 14, 2017 - 9:09 pm | Permalink

    The problem with the left and the anti-White movement is that it has no procedure leading to infallible dogma.
    There is no agency to speak ex cathedral.

    As far as mathematics being the only means to certainly goes, what about the certainty that “mathematics is the only means to certainly”?
    Certainly not a mathematical proposition.

  6. John's Gravatar John
    February 14, 2017 - 4:56 pm | Permalink

    I think our movement is starting to make some real progress. This guy was literally the biggest thing on YouTube and his subscribers are probably mostly young people.

    YouTube Cancels Pewdiepie’s Show, Removes Him From Premium Advertising

    Patricia Hernandez
    Today 9:08am

    A month after YouTube’s biggest star uploaded a video containing the phrase “Death To All Jews,” the service that once hosted that very content is distancing itself a bit from Felix Kjellberg.

    Variety reports that YouTube has cancelled the second season of Scare Pewdiepie, the premium $10-a-month show that sought to scare Kjellberg IRL in elaborate, video-game inspired ways. Additionally, YouTube will also remove Pewdiepie from “Google Preferred,” which is an advertising service for “brand-safe” content (which Pewdiepie is most certainly not, even discounting the nazi jokes.)

    Taken together, both of these repercussions will have some kind of effect on Pewdiepie’s actual income, though he will still be able to monetize his videos through normal means on YouTube. In the past, Kjellberg has said that his normal income-per-view on YouTube is low because his brand of ‘edgy’ humor also limits the advertisers that YouTube makes available to him. “My content is not necessarily family friendly, it’s got a bunch of profanity,” Kjellberg said.

    YouTube’s decision follows the news that Maker Studios, a division of Disney, also cut ties with Kjellberg over videos with anti-Semitic jokes. The most infamous video had Kjellberg paying a pair of men to hold up a sign that said “Death To All Jews,” though he has been known to reference Hitler and Nazis in plenty of other videos as well. It blew up to the point where Kjellberg started garnering support from real neo-Nazis.

    Scare Pewdiepie season two was announced last year as a collaboration between the executive producers of The Walking Dead, as well as Maker Studios—the latter which might explain the sudden cancelation. The first season is still available online. Many of the videos that sparked the nazi controversy, however, are no longer available.

    For his part, Kjellberg has insisted that he didn’t intend his ongoing nazi references to support anti-semitism. “I was trying to show how crazy the modern world is, specifically some of the services available online,” Kjellberg wrote on Tumblr. “I picked something that seemed absurd to me—That people on Fiverr would say anything for 5 dollars.”

    http://kotaku.com/youtube-cancels-pewdiepies-show-removes-him-from-premi-1792339668

  7. Joe six-pack's Gravatar Joe six-pack
    February 14, 2017 - 3:31 pm | Permalink

    They will never listen to reason, they will never listen to facts. They have made up their minds in school, coupled with media consumption.
    Its hard to change a mind, science progresses one funeral at a time.
    From Wikipedia, “Semmelweis reflex or “Semmelweis effect” is a metaphor for the reflex-like tendency to reject new evidence or new knowledge because it contradicts established norms, beliefs or paradigms.”

    All that works is greater emotion, greater anger.

  8. February 14, 2017 - 3:13 pm | Permalink

    Hmmm … i may have another possible explanation for this sudden jewish change of heart … May be they are CONTENT with what they have achieved …. creating a dysfunctional disintegrating multicultural Europe .. and what has been achieved is IREVERSIBLE .. they know …an amputated castrated giant …. It is now time to support the other side… encouraging immense HATRED …. a profound insurmountable HATRED .. never to cease… DIVIDE and RULE it is called .. and THAT will secure The Promised Land .. when the destabilisation and depopulation in the lands between Nile and Eufrates …has taken its final genocidal course .. They are working hard at it 1

    • Kai Wesselchak's Gravatar Kai Wesselchak
      February 14, 2017 - 5:05 pm | Permalink

      Exactly. Remember that the Jewish false paradigm of (expanding) No-Go Zone Segregation vs. race-mixing “integration” helps the Jews either way.

  9. Bobby's Gravatar Bobby
    February 14, 2017 - 2:59 pm | Permalink

    “Stale Pale Folk”..LOL

  10. Sheila's Gravatar Sheila
    February 14, 2017 - 1:00 pm | Permalink

    I think to comprehend the true *Leninization of Marxism* is to understand the pace of the hatred of the White Race and the various movements in Europe and America. The likes of S Sontag merely gave it a mere mega boost in the later part of last century which seemed appealing to many White left-leaning liberals of a pathological nature. Another cool article, thanks.

  11. John's Gravatar John
    February 14, 2017 - 12:12 pm | Permalink

    Another thing that mathematicians do is strip away all excess and leave just a bare, efficient proof. They don’t try to bullshit and impress with flowery language – although bs and flowery language may be useful in persuasion.

  12. February 14, 2017 - 11:13 am | Permalink

    At the awful risk of being called a bigot by Mr Langdon, there’s no question he’s understating the part played by Jews. For example, when he claims … in South Africa and Zimbabwe, … oppressed Blacks demanded equality, took over well-run White institutions, and began to destroy them everyone familiar with the issues knows Jews with money and weapons, and the so-called ‘Communist Party’, were behind the anti-white activities. Another example is of course Macpherson, who gives his name to groups of Jewish ‘activists’ behind the scenes. And another example is the evasive phrase ‘cultural Marxism’ which simply means Jewish policies. And another is the ascription of ‘minorities’ to the USSR when of course they were almost all Jews, and the claim that ‘minorities’ are always enraged and energised into getting on top, which is manifest nonsense. It’s amusing to see some of the puppets shrieking their simple education-free slogans, but racist and supremacist Jews remain in control of these sad and bogus ‘academic’ institutions. At least for now.

  13. PT's Gravatar PT
    February 14, 2017 - 10:54 am | Permalink

    How can Cultural Marxism be defeated? How can a society be organized so that the Host and the Minority can co-exist in a balanced fashion?

    • Bobby's Gravatar Bobby
      February 14, 2017 - 3:08 pm | Permalink

      I doubt it can be so organized if the needs, beliefs, customs, just plain differences of the different groups are too great. In a way, it would be like a baseball league in which severely handicapped people were allowed to play with people of strong limbs and minds. How can it be possible? It isn’t even limited to Hosts and Minorities. It can be between different “minorities.” It’s sad, but this is how the world works!! There isn’t even a need to justify trying these things, if the goal is playing to compete and win.

  14. Gilbert Huntly's Gravatar Gilbert Huntly
    February 14, 2017 - 10:37 am | Permalink

    The best and most effective strategy against the malady of cultural Marxism is to get over the fear of being called “racist”. No argument. I will not deny it!

  15. John Connell's Gravatar John Connell
    February 14, 2017 - 10:33 am | Permalink

    “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas S. Kuhn.”

    • Bobby's Gravatar Bobby
      February 14, 2017 - 3:11 pm | Permalink

      Are you referencing Kuhn’s thoughts on the emergence of new paradigms?

Comments are closed.