Ed Dutton with an Evolutionary Perspective on the Rape of Finland

The Silent Rape Epidemic: How the Finns Were Groomed to Love Their Abusers
Edward Dutton
Oulu, Finland: Thomas Edward Press, 2019

Finns enjoy an unusually high-trust society. Longtime British resident Ed Dutton describes unmanned roadside vegetable stands that operate on the honor system, with customers reliably leaving the correct price for what they take. Travelers need not purchase a ticket before boarding a train; everyone happily pays the conductor as he comes through. At least until recently, girls in outlying villages could safely hitchhike into larger towns on Saturday nights.

Oulu (pronounced Oh-loo) is the largest city in northern Finland. It tends to be a dull place, and residents like it that way:

Very little crime, very little conflict; very little to report: Everyone eating the same kind of food, wearing the same kind of clothes, following the same cultural traditions: trusting, safe, predictable. The perfect place to raise a child.

By 2005, however, the city had begun accepting small numbers of Muslim ‘refugees.’ That summer,

a 30-year-old worker for the Finnish Lutheran Church had been naïve enough to get talking to a group of Muslim men in a bar and, worse still, go back to their flat. She was rewarded for her friendliness towards these guests by having her clitoris cut off with a pair of scissors which were then inserted into her vagina.

During the next couple of years, several local women were raped by Muslim men in city parks. By 2008, the trend was being reported in a national tabloid—which, however, failed to mention that all of the assaults had been carried out by Middle Eastern men. Oulu’s local daily, Kaleva, stopped reporting perpetrators’ names. As in other Western countries, Finnish journalists tend to be aggressively cosmopolitan leftists who despise the folks back home, ordinary Finns with “their simple desire for a picturesque wooden house close to a lake; their contentment living in a society where people mostly think in the same way.” If such narrow-minded yokels were to learn what was really going on, the multicultural project might be threatened!

Soon, the names of Muslim criminals were being redacted from police and court press releases as well. Official reports spoke only of men “of foreign background,” as if Finnish women were being attacked by German tourists or Japanese guest lecturers from the local university. But the authorities knew the truth: a 2018 a study by the Finnish Police Academy found that 93% of rapes of foreigners in Finland in 2016 had been committed by men from Islamic countries.

In the spring of 2015, Juha Sipilä was elected Prime Minster of Finland on a platform of admitting fewer refugees. But in September of the same year, once Angela Merkel had opened the floodgates, he did an about face and offered refuge to 32,478 persons, mainly young Muslim men. Sipilä even persuaded some Finns to take such men into their own houses, promising to do so himself (he never did).

Within a month of their arrival in northern Finland, 60 of these supposedly desperate asylum seekers were staging a protest in front of Oulu’s police station: they didn’t care for the traditional Finnish food offered at the local refugee center. Authorities obediently changed the menu.  The incidence of rape and sexual assault in Northern Finland quickly increased. The first gang rape occurred as early as November 2015 in the town of Kempele, a few miles from Oulu, where several ‘refugees’ had been settled; the victim was a fifteen-year-old girl.

As official sources continued to suppress information about the perpetrators, a local couple established a reputation as an accurate source of information. Junes Lokka (b. 1979), a half-Moroccan computer programmer, and his fiancée Tiina Wiik (b. 1985), who blogs under the name ‘Swan of Tuonela,’ began livestreaming phone-ins and interviews on YouTube. They also maintained contacts with ‘Alt Right’ figures worldwide: both Jared Taylor and Kevin MacDonald, for instance, have appeared on their internet shows. In 2017, Lokka won election to the Oulu city council as an independent, with Wiik serving as vice-councilor.

In November, 2018, two local fathers set a trap for a Muslim molester operating in a city park.

They’d called the police so that he’d effectively be caught in, or almost in, the act. But, amazingly, the police didn’t seem particularly interested. Although they arrested the diversifier, they didn’t even bother to check the man’s phone nor search his flat. If anything, they appeared irritated by what the fathers had done.

One of these fathers shared his story with Junes Lokka, who contacted the local court. Courts in Finland, unlike the police or reporters, are legally obliged to reveal the identities of all persons accused. Lokka found a list of seven men, besides the one caught by the two fathers, scheduled to appear on November 28th to face charges of rape or sexual assault: ‘Rahmani Gheibali, Yosefi Shiraqa, Mirzad Javad, Barhum Abdullhadi, Humad Osman Ahmed Mohamed, Mohamed Ali Osman… —all of them post-2015 arrivals from the Middle East. Their victims had been as young as ten. The local newspaper, Kaleva, certainly knew about it, since they receive the court records every day by email, but had colluded to hide what was happening from their readers.

Lokka realized he had stumbled upon an organized ‘grooming gang’ of the type familiar from Rotherham in England. Most of the men operated at a local shopping mall, chatting up under-age Finnish girls in English or broken Finnish and luring them away with alcohol. He published the list of names and charges online, and word spread quickly. On December 4th, an alternative newspaper reported the full details. It became a national scandal, with authorities rushing to deplore the crimes they had previously attempted to keep secret. “The offenses in Oulu are appalling,” said the turncoat Prime Minister responsible for letting the criminals into the country. The Interior Minister chimed in with promises of tougher laws to deport foreign criminals, but the public knew that only a few months before he had been saying Finland could happily take 10,000 Muslim ‘refugees’ annually, rather than the usual 1,000. Dutton recounts:

Oulu was in shock, not so much that there were Muslim rapes — they’d had to deal with that since at least 2005 — but that these could be systematically organised, directed against underage girls, and covered-up by the authorities. On the night of 6th December, the 101st anniversary of Finnish independence, there was a torch-lit parade of nationalists through Oulu. There had been no such thing in previous years. They made their way to the city’s cemetery where, watched over by police, I witnessed them give tense, angry speeches to the applause of a largely working-class audience.

On the afternoon of 10th December, roughly 100 furious Finns braved the cold, sleet and an intimidatingly heavy police presence to protest against the cover up and the rapes, in front of Oulu city hall. In thirteen years of living in Finland, I had never witnessed anything like it. Finns are stereotypically trusting, cooperative, taciturn and desperate not to offend. Yet, as councilors walked into the town hall that dark evening, they were greeted with screams of ‘traitor!’ At one point, a brave Muslim construction worker arose and began to defend Islam from the criticisms which some speakers were vociferously levelling against it. Hissed and jeered by the furious Finns, he was dragged from the steps and beaten up, with the police marching him away, not daring to inflame the mob by arresting those who’d slapped him around until he squealed.

Two weeks later, on 26th December, the windows of Oulu’s small mosque were smashed. The presiding Imam, Dr. Abdul Mannan, is a Social Democratic vice-councilor in town. He is also a Wahhabi who advocates the adoption of sharia law in Finland. In 2017 his son-in-law was killed fighting for ISIS in Iraq.

In early January 2019, more local grooming cases were revealed, bringing the number of accused to sixteen. It also came to light that a 14-year-old girl had hanged herself in October, 2018 after being raped by Muslim men. Oulu’s police took to the newspapers to deny the story, but a week later they were forced to admit that the ‘refugees’ had, indirectly, claimed their first life.

The next day, roughly 50 members of the vigilante group Soldiers of Odin rallied at [the local shopping mall] — now heavily police-patrolled and clear of Muslim men — and marched through the snow blanketed city. In the evening, to quell the public mood, both the Prime Minister and the Interior Minister gave press conferences about the situation at Oulu city hall where MSM journalists asked them easy questions.

The very next day, the first reports emerged of Muslim grooming activity in the capital, Helsinki. In Oulu as well, new cases kept coming to light. On 20th February, police commissioner Markus Kiiskanen announced that the police were investigating 29 ‘foreign’ men for child rape and sexual assault in Oulu. Even at this stage, no one in any official position was bothering to clarify that the ‘foreigners’ involved were not Norwegians. The scandal became international news, with British dissidents Katie Hopkins and Tommy Robinson separately travelling to Finland to meet Lokka and Wiik.

Such, in brief, are the events that inspired the book under review, all related in its first chapter. In the rest of the work, Dutton uses evolutionary psychology to shed light on why the rape epidemic occurred and why the Finnish authorities have responded to it so weakly. The central reason is disarmingly simple, though its causes reach deep into the Finns’ evolutionary history: Finns are too nice.

Visitors to Finland strongly agree in their characterization of the locals as quiet, unemotional, hard-working, honest and rule-following, stoical, and anxious to please. They also have the highest average intelligence in Europe: this is associated with kindness, conscientiousness and altruism, but also with low self-esteem, including shyness and a strong desire to conform. Finnish men are also rather low in testosterone, because the climate in which they evolved rewarded men who could cooperate with one another more than those inclined to aggression and impulsiveness.

These traits characterize Northeast Asians as well, and Finns have around 10% Northeast Asian admixture. Until as recently as the 1960s, Finns were sometimes actually classed as ‘Mongoloids.’ This was an exaggeration, but the Finno-Ugric peoples do represent a genetic cline in that direction.

High social anxiety and a desire to please are associated with low self-esteem. Dutton recounts that foreigners like himself often get asked what they think about the Finns: “this concern about the opinion of others is a marker of high Agreeableness and low self-esteem, as it is people with these traits who are most concerned about the feelings of others.” A Finnish sociologist named Tarja Laine has studied the national inferiority complex in detail:

She claims Finns are often ‘discontented with the nation’ and ‘ashamed of themselves.’ Laine argues that there is a history of self-stigmatization in Finland, because Finnishness was defined as ‘inferior to the rest of Europe’ [and] also notes how deeply concerned Finns were about what foreigners would think of them when they hosted the summer Olympics in 1952.

Women with low self-esteem are more anxious to please the men with whom they interact, and thus susceptible to the attentions of seducers.

Finland has historically been a poor nation. Famine carried off 20% of the population as recently as 1866–68, and the country remained predominantly agricultural until the 1950s. This means that Darwinian natural selection remained strong until quite recently. The harsher the environment, the more strongly men must be adapted to it in order to survive. For this reason, Finns have an exceptionally small gene pool.

This means fewer individual outliers, whether for intelligence or personality. The rarity of outlier high intelligence, along with high social anxiety and conformism, explains why Finland has produced fewer men of outstanding achievement than the country’s high average IQ would lead one to expect, and most of these have emerged from the country’s genetically atypical Swedish-speaking minority. An allele associated with inquisitiveness has been shown to be less common in Finland than any other European country (and absent from East Asian populations).

Dutton’s previous work on the personality traits typical of genius indicate such men must have

the ability to think unconventionally, to withstand criticism and even ridicule, and to have the self-confidence and doggedness to pursue very hard work for many years with little or no support and sometimes in the face of outright antagonism. That kind of person tends to be bold, critical, idiosyncratic and unconventional, which is often perceived by people as annoying, arrogant, controversial, and provocative.

The reader can readily see this is very nearly the opposite of the personality type which we have described as predominating in Finland. High social anxiety and conformism, along with a relative lack of personality outliers, means very few Finns are bold enough to ‘rock the boat’ and question things. It may sound ironic, but it is quite possibly not an accident that the Finn most responsible for blowing the lid on Muslim grooming gangs is half-Moroccan.

The personality profile of Finland can be explained in terms of one of the currently recognized ‘big five’ dimensions of personality, viz., empathy. Like all dimensions of personality, it represents a spectrum, with most people bunched toward the middle and ever fewer toward the maladaptive extremes. The disorder known as autism refers to pathologically low empathy. Autists cannot understand or perceive the feelings of others. Those suffering from the mild form of autism known as Asperger’s syndrome are bad at reading the feelings of others from facial expressions or verbal cues: e.g., they may be slow to take a hint. They are also good at withstanding disapproval, one of Dutton’s ‘genius’ traits.

At the other extreme of the empathy scale lies schizophrenia. Schizophrenics obsess over what others are thinking and feeling. They are prone to reading too much into the behavior of others: “Thus, a subtle cue indicating that someone is slightly annoyed or upset may be understood by a schizophrenic to mean that the person is dangerously angry and wants to kill them.” Milder symptoms may include social anxiety, anhedonia (the inability to feel joy), apathy, and derealization, in which one does not perceive the external world as quite ‘real.’ Such persons may even be capable of remaining inert in the face of immediate peril (e.g., to the tribe’s women). They also tend to be bad at theorizing, prone to jumping to conclusions, and biased against disconfirmatory evidence (e.g., that a beloved policy is producing disastrous results). Mild schizophrenia is known as schizoid personality disorder.

The symptoms of schizoid personality disorder closely match the Finnish personality profile. Schizophrenia spectrum disorders are, in fact, diagnosed more frequently in Finland than elsewhere in Europe: at three times the rate of the UK, for instance. They are, however, diagnosed at only one third the rate in Northeast Asia; here again, Finns represent a clinal type.

Intriguingly, Dutton mentions that the highly empathetic or schizoid personality type tends also to be associated with a certain kind of religiosity, viz., the disposition to see nonhuman nature and historical events as meaningful products of intention, i.e., as providential. He reports that on his first visit to the country in 2003, everyone he got introduced to “was, by English standards at least, religious: baptized, confirmed, paid up members of the Finnish Lutheran Church, as were about 85% of Finns at the time.” The poverty of premodern Finland and the harshness of the climate also help to explain the traditionally religious character of the people: psychologically, religion is a stress-coping mechanism. Secularization is now occurring, but with a noticeable lag behind Northwestern Europe.

Religiosity, even when it involves a universalistic religion such as Christianity, is associated with high ethnocentrism. This includes both positive ethnocentrism, or attachment to one’s people and its ways, and negative ethnocentrism, or distrust/dislike of outsiders. The strongly religious are prone to conceiving of their nation as enjoying the special protection of God, and of their enemies as being in league with the devil. In this connection, we should note that the normally mild-mannered Finns have a longstanding reputation as formidable soldiers; the ferocity with which the nation stood up to the Red Army in the Winter War of 1939–40 is legendary. Computer modelling reveals that more ethnocentric people win out over less ethnocentric over time, all else being equal.

The Soviet annexation of Eastern Karelia after World War II gave occasion for an extraordinary national display of positive ethnocentrism:

The government mandated, and the population accepted, that people must divide up their properties in order to take families of Karelian refugees into their homes. A room rationing system was imposed, on the basis of one family per room. My father-in-law recalled this happening. Even though their house wasn’t particularly big, it was divided down the middle, with Karelians living in one half and his family squashed together in the other. Farmers also found parts of their land subject to compulsory purchase so that Karelians could farm [it].

As an example of negative ethnocentrism, Finnish treatment of Russian prisoners of war could be harsh in the extreme:

Russians were put into concentration camps where they were given insufficient rations. These camps had a very high mortality rate: 17% of those who went in died there due to malnutrition and disease. Captured Soviet soldiers had to work bare foot. By the summer of 1942, many were reduced to eating grass. Approximately 1200 of these POWs were shot without trial.

The typically Finnish psychological profile can be explained by means of life history theory. Schizoid-leaning personality traits are aspects of the slow life history strategy characteristic of harsh yet stable environments. In such environments, the carrying capacity of the ecology for a particular species is quickly reached, so its members start to compete more keenly with one other in a sort of “arms race of adapting to the environment,” gradually shrinking the gene pool. Individuals invest less energy in procreation and more in nurturance of offspring, having fewer children but carefully teaching them how to thrive in their difficult environment. The result is that life slows down: childhood lasts a long time, with puberty and the onset of sexual activity delayed. Sexual behavior tends strongly to monogamy and the generous investment of resources in mates. This selects for higher altruism, as there is competition for mates, and higher impulse control, allowing planning for the future. In a predictable environment, such efforts tend to pay off in the long run, and there is more likely to be a payback for cooperation as people live longer and invest in reciprocity.

In a harsh environment where cooperation promotes survival, people create strong social and affective bonds. Extraversion decreases because the results of risks become easier to predict. More energy is invested in developing a complex mind; less is invested in the body. Also, the mental and behavioral qualities of a potential spouse become more important factors of sexual attraction. A man wants to be confident of paternity, and confident that his wife will be a good mother, so he selects for Conscientiousness and Agreeableness; over evolutionary time, women adapt accordingly.

Slow life strategy societies impose strict norms and are highly conformist. A cooperative personality can societies are so strongly attuned to their environment, members must be more environmentally plastic: more has to be learned and less is simply instinctive. ‘Culture’ — rather than instinct — is more central to the group’s way of life.

Finns consider their country strongly democratic, but Dutton believes this view must be qualified. High social trust does predict democracy to some extent, since parties must, e.g., trust their opponents to yield power in response to electoral losses. But, as the American founders well knew, a certain distrust—particularly of ambitious, power-seeking politicians—is also necessary to keep institutions from becoming corrupt. Our founders were right: there is good evidence that highly intelligent psychopaths, with their ability to manipulate the less intelligent, more emotional and more trusting, are especially likely to rise to positions of power. Postwar Finland offers an edifying instance of this.

Urho Kekkonen (1900–1986) was in no way a Communist sympathizer. He served in the White Guard during the country’s fierce and bloody civil war of 1918, and belonged to the interwar Academic Karelia Society which advocated for a Greater Finland incorporating Soviet East Karelia. But once elected president of the country in 1956,

he was able to persuade people that there was an imminent threat of Soviet invasion and that only he had the skill to successfully negotiate with the Soviet leadership and save the country. With his large following, people in positions of power were prepared to do his bidding. If you questioned him — and particularly his foreign policy — he would declare you to be ‘out of favour at court.’ This could have serious consequences for [one’s] employment. By the 1970s, Kekkonen’s power was so great, his control of the media and the parliament so tight, and censorship so endemic (in fact strong criticism of the Soviets was effectively illegal) that the reality of Finland’s ‘democracy’ came into question in the West. National policy was, in many cases, okayed by Moscow before being put into action.

Kekkonen ‘played the Moscow card’ not merely to protect Finnish independence, but to maintain his personal power:

In 1961, it was looking like he might lose the presidential election to conservative Olavi Honka. The USSR sent a ‘note’ referring to the threat of ‘war,’ possibly because they wanted Kekkonen re-elected. This created the ‘Note Crisis,’ Kekkonen went to the USSR to sort it out and eventually he was re-elected overwhelmingly after Honka withdrew.

In short, the Finns behaved like the schizophrenic who imagined a moderately irritated man was out to kill him. It is widely suspected, although unproven, that the whole ‘Note Crisis’ was masterminded by the Machiavellian Kekkonen himself.

So conformist are the Finnish people that they were uneasy over the country’s 1994 referendum on whether to join the EU, fearing the public expression of a plurality of opinions would prove a ‘national crisis’ and tear the country apart. According to one Finnish observer, voters asked themselves not whether joining the EU would be beneficial to the country, but ‘How can we make ourselves fit for the EU?’ The whole referendum was marked by intense concern about the perceptions of others, national insecurity and kow-towing to those perceived as important: in this case, Western Europeans.

Finland’s response to the Danish Cartoon Crisis is similarly instructive. While the drawings of Muhammad were widely reproduced in Western Europe, and the governments of Denmark and Norway affirmed newspapers’ right to publish them, all mainstream Finnish papers declined to do so. When the website of a small Finnish nationalist group posted the cartoons, both the Prime Minster and President of Finland publicly apologized. Unsuccessful attempts were made to prosecute the nationalists.

Multiculturalism and Muslim immigration came later to Finland than to other European nations, but once they arrived, Finnish conformism made them difficult to combat:

To a certain extent, Kekkonen’s quarter-century rule kept Finland sealed off from the antinationalism and Multiculturalism that was affecting many Western countries by the 1970s. Kekkonen, however, couldn’t do much about the rejuvenation of Marxism in Finland — especially considering the delicate relationship with the Soviets — and these ideological successors to the defeated Reds were, by the 1990s, espousing Multiculturalism. By the time I came to Finland, the attitude of the kind of people who work for Oulu City Council was that Oulu should ‘internationalise.’ [Multiculturalism] was regarded as a way of turning Finland into a proper, ‘modern’ Western European country, just like the Multicultural ‘big boys’ such as Sweden and the UK.

Finland’s Lutheran church is now in free-fall. As recently as 1980, 90% of Finns were still members; today the figure is 69%, and the decline seems to be accelerating. Dutton reports that in his early days in Oulu, homosexuality was seldom discussed, or it was dismissed with the remark that ‘gays go to Helsinki.’ But by 2018, the town had its own annual gay pride parade graced by the presence of the local Lutheran clergymen. He also shares an anecdote about a young female student of his who submitted an essay arguing that the voluntary religious instruction still offered at Finnish schools be abolished in favor of compulsory multicultural education, the gist of which would be that the races are equal and there is no God.

As noted above, religion favors ethnocentrism, so the collapse of Lutheranism is certainly relevant to the rapid entrenchment of multiculturalism. Dutton believes the spread of such maladaptive ideas and behavior is a result of increased mutational load in the Finnish population. This has been caused by the relaxing of Darwinian selection consequent upon the country’s recent prosperity. He notes that maladaptive ideas tend to originate among social elites less subject to selective pressures than working people.

In 2015, however, enough ordinary Finns retained a common-sense skepticism about the wisdom of mass immigration to elect a restrictionist governing coalition consisting of the Center Party and the explicitly nationalist True Finns. That September, when Prime Minister Juha Sipilä performed his volte-face, announcing the admission of tens of thousands of new ‘refugees’, Dutton expected the governing coalition to fall apart: ‘The True Finns will not tolerate this; their leader will bring down the government.’ Instead, in best Finnish style, he meekly acquiesced in the Prime Minister’s decision. As a consequence, two years later the party’s livid followers replaced him with a hardliner. The other members of the government were not prepared to allow such a troublemaker into the cabinet, however, and once more the ruling coalition was in danger. But rather than forcing the issue, all the True Finns’ government members and about half their MPs split to form a new party called ‘Blue Reform.’ It has virtually no public support but, at least for the time being, has succeeded in keeping genuine patriotic opposition to multiculturalism out of the government. Dutton wryly concludes:

We know what happened as a consequence of these two betrayals. Preventable rapes, Oulu’s grooming gangs and the almost successful attempt by the Finnish Establishment to cover up the suicide of a raped teenage girl. . . . But, on the plus side, at least Oulu wasn’t as boring as it had been in 2003.

So much for the weak Finnish response to the Muslim rape campaign against their women. What might evolutionary psychology have to say about the behavior of the Muslims themselves?

Any man living as a Middle Eastern ‘refugee’ in Finland or any other Western country is in a position of extremely low social status, and thus quite unattractive to females. On the basis of nationality alone, many Western women would never consider marrying even a socioeconomically successful Middle Eastern man. In such a context, rape becomes an attractive option—especially gang rape, as this affords protection of a gang, lowers the risk of prosecution, and means the victim can be more easily overpowered. Polygamous Islamic societies subject women to purdah precisely to protect them from such gangs of single, low-status men—and to allow high-status men to monopolize them.

Many of the girls raped in Oulu were from impoverished, run-down areas of the city. Rape gangs target girls whose own relatively low socioeconomic status correlates with a faster life history strategy: sexual promiscuity, early sexual maturation, and attraction to physical status — strength and the ability to win fights — rather than socioeconomic status. Such girls will tend to be less intelligent, easier to manipulate and to access sexually; their family bonds are likely to be weaker and their parents less concerned about their whereabouts. Social elites care less about these girls, expressing disdain for such social inferiors with terms such as juntti (hicks or yokals) and pummi (bums).

That the girls were from a different ethnic group than the Muslim men elevated the probability of rape. People act to further the interests of their group: if it is of low status, one way to raise it is through raping girls from a more dominant group. Rape asserts dominance not just over the females themselves, but also over the males on the opposing side:

It destroys their morale and undermines their confidence, because the conquerors assert dominance and control over the central resource for future existence, namely the wombs of [their] women. Rape can be a deliberate war strategy, because it creates deep trauma and insecurity among the victims and their networks, helping to undermine their ability to defend themselves.

Seeing themselves as jihadis waging war against Finnish infidels is a convenient way for Muslim refugees to salve their battered self-esteem, and rape in the context of Holy War is explicitly endorsed by the Koran.

Dutton concludes that if a large number of very low-status males from the same ethnic group are thrust into a homogenous, high-trust community of a different ethnicity, the predictable result will be rape: ‘Oulu’s Muslim Grooming Scandal was inevitable the moment significant numbers of young, single Muslim males were accommodated in the city.’

The near future does not look bright. The late Finnish political scientist Tatu Vanhanen has estimated the correlation of diversity with ethnic conflict at +0.66. In increasingly diverse settings, people identify more strongly with their group. This means that Muslims are not going to integrate, and will come to perceive Finns as their enemies (if they do not already). Finns uncommitted to multiculturalism will start to mirror this behavior, and the country may spiral into a low-level civil war. Meanwhile, elite Finns who cling to multicultural thinking will vye with one another to demonstrate how deeply they care about ‘refugees’ supposedly being victimized by their bigoted co-ethnics. This will lead to a collapse of trust within the ethnic majority. Many ordinary Finns already distrust the news media and government, and this will intensify as well.

Dutton recalls how distrust of the police in the Northern Ireland of the 1970s led to the formation of paramilitary forces which controlled large Catholic areas hostile to the government. He sees the beginnings of something similar in the Soldiers of Odin now patrolling Finnish streets. The welfare state will become unsustainable under such circumstances, depending as it does on a sense of national kinship. The economy can be expected to deteriorate and crime to increase, even among ethnic Finns.

In the longer run, however, social trends that cannot go on forever can be relied upon to stop. As Finland becomes a more stressful and dangerous place to live, some sort of religious revival is likely, which will both raise the native birthrate and steel Finns’ resolve for the struggle. Nationalist parties will grow. As Dutton notes:

Computer models have demonstrated that once 25% of a group adhere to a counter-cultural viewpoint, such as ethnocentrism currently is, and become activists fervently advocating it, they tip the opinion of the entire group towards their own. And all else controlled for, the more ethnocentric group will always triumph. As discussed, Finns are high in conformism, so when the country ‘flips’ from multiculturalism back to nationalism, it will happen very quickly.

Observers appalled at the apparent weakness of the Finns’ initial response to Muslim rape gangs will do well to recall the ferocity this nation has historically demonstrated in defending itself, and bear in mind the poet’s warning: Beware the fury of a patient man.

29 replies
  1. Tim Folke
    Tim Folke says:

    I have relatives in Finland and am well aware of the agony caused by these ‘refugees’ and ‘immigrants’.

    Part of the solution, and not only for Finland but for all White nations that finally awaken, is to not only stop further immigration, but to expel those already there, as well as their offspring.

    Inhumane? Cruel? Racist? Yeah, whatever. But the issue for our people is simple – live or die. And, as they say in the military, there is no problem that cannot be solved by either prayer or violence.

    • pterodactyl
      pterodactyl says:

      @Tim If it is inhuman then we can pay them to go back, and even pay them so much a month for life even after they are gone. It will be worth it in the long run as conflict can be expensive. They would in fact end up the wealthier ones in their countries. Many would like to go back, (and third generation call their countries of origin ‘my country’) and are only in the West because our politicians lured them over with our money.

    • Armor
      Armor says:

      Everybody already opposes immigration except the government and the media. Social conformism means that voters who oppose race-replacement vote for political parties that support the policy. This is because the anti-replacement point of view is vilified in the media and not allowed in the country’s political life. This is a problem of censorship and soft dictatorship. The race-replacists did not conquer power by persuading people that they need to be race-replaced. They are liars, and they were co-opted by people who used dirty tricks.

      In France, Britain and the USA, White people need not be persuaded that race-replacement is a bad idea. They must be made to understand that the driving force behind race-replacement is Jewish. The situation is a little different in Finland, but there too, people need to understand that their government wants them dead.

      Actually, the Finnish government doesn’t exactly want Finland dead. It wants to imitate what is being done in the West. The result is the same. I don’t believe in the 25% tipping point theory. It depends how far the government is ready to go in censoring and oppressing people. If the government is made of real Finns and not Jews, I would expect them to become uncomfortable with the dictatorship and the race-replacement program. But I don’t understand in the first place how their conformism led them to follow the West’s Jewish ideology instead of traditional Finnish nationalism.

      Obviously, the best solution would be for the True Finns to get elected to power, and then, use their political power to enforce a new conformism, compatible with popular opinion and with the survival of the nation.

      • pterodactyl
        pterodactyl says:

        “Social conformism means that voters who oppose race-replacement vote for political parties that support the policy.”

        This sentence sums up and explains why the West is in the mess that it is, and why the West is on the path to national suicide.

        The response could be:

        (a) You poor stupid voter, it is not your fault that you are so stupid that you vote for politicians with the opposite views to your own – you are innocent lambs fooled by cunning foxes.

        or

        (b) You selfish fools voting selfishly for the party that you think will favour your subgroup and are so preoccupied with your selfishness that you are prepared to take a few dollars of a bribe and in return you will let them get on with wrecking your country. You deserve what is coming to you.

  2. Philip Smeeton
    Philip Smeeton says:

    We are all taking care of our own best self-interest. It is when nations and individuals stop taking care of their own best self-interest that things go wrong. When they start living according to selfless principles. Anyone that does not think about their own self-interest will; starve to death, be abused, robbed, enslaved or murdered. You have to defend yourself against those that would do you harm. As we cannot survive alone, our own self-interest is best served by surrounding ourselves with people that understand and share common interests. And that will defend these interests.

    • pterodactyl
      pterodactyl says:

      It is possible that humans are not wired to be committed to self-interest directly, and instead are wired to be committed to the culture.

      In a prehistoric tribe where everyone was thinking about self-interest, they would start to worry about decisions and how these related to self-interest. This would lead to debates and a 50:50 split of opinion and disunity. Meanwhile, the tribe that was united through their culture in an unthinking way would win the wars. And religion can reinforce this, as the people are doubly committed if they think their gods approve of their culture.

      So humans are wired or programmed to have very alert antennae to pick up the culture and follow it. We can see this in school children, where even 7 year olds know what they can and cannot say when it comes to racism sexism etc. A 7 year old would not be able to do this very sophisticated and demanding task (of picking up accepted ways to think) unless it was a part of their thinking that is very deeply ingrained, ie the human brain allocates many neurons to this task, ie a lot of their behaviour wiring is devoted to picking up the culture and following it, but NOT to assessing it, as these children demonstrate.

      And as humans do not assess the culture, they never think about whether the current one is actually going to take them on a path to national disaster & suicide – they simply never go there as they are not wired to think about these things.

      In the Soviet Union the posters would make ridiculous statements about communism being ‘for the people’ which no-one would believe if they thought about them, but the idea was never to think about them, it was to accept them as declarations of who was in charge of the culture. The posters were saying ‘We communists are in charge, we are the dominant culture and if you want to get on, be loyal to us’.

      The readers of this blog are part of the small minority who do think about things, including whether our governments in the West are deliberately taking us on a path to our own demise, but we are the exceptions. Many like us cannot understand why everyone does not wake up now that the anti-white agenda is slapping them in the face, but the only explanation is that most people give priority to FOLLOWING the current culture, and NOT to assessing it.

      Now we have a cold civil war in the West with two competing cultures for people to choose from: globalism/nationalism or left/right or low/high or inferior/superior anti-white/pro-white treachery/patriotism.

      The good news is contained in the last paragraph of the article, as 90% will follow the winning culture, whatever it is, and so a switch away from the current culture of white self-hate could be rapid & profound. Especially as the new culture would be in alignment with self-interest, not against it. Despite people being willing to follow a self-hate culture for the reasons stated above, they will be much more at ease following one that is in their interests. It is like a policeman who is prepared to work for Macron and the EU and to batter his own people, but would be more at ease if he could have a different role and be a patriot.

      The switch of the 90% to a new culture of patriotism could come (a) after a trigger event (b) when life becomes hard again rather than pampered as at present (c) when a critical number in the West become aware that their MSM & government are acting against white people. This could happen quickly if the left lose their current level of control of the media, or, if the current level of freedom that we still have on the internet manages to persist for a few years more the same awakening could happen (as we are currently at the de-platforming stage but all the information is still out there).

  3. Rerevisionist
    Rerevisionist says:

    You’ve forgotten to mention Jewish power, notably in controlling paper currencies and it purchase of assets, and control of news sources and bribery of politicians. It amazes me that a website nominally influenced by Kevin Macdonald, something like 25 years after his publications, omits this fact, along with the Jewish control of the USSR. Maybe in the next 25 years, Mr Devlin?

    • Richard B
      Richard B says:

      Rerevisionist: Yes, there does seem to be something that’s going on with TOO. It’s good we question it and I have no doubt that they’ll respect our need to do so. In short, as long as we’re respectful and have a valid point we need not worry about being censored.

      My gut response to certain changes I’ve noticed, such as the sort of conspicuous admissions you and others have mentioned, is simply that someone got to them. This is going on at certain video channels too that link to TOO.

      We all know they’re cracking down on everyone. So we’re safe in assuming TOO is a high prioritity for them, since it offers some of the best content available.

      There is no question at all about KM’s courage and honesty. None. So I think they deserve the benefit of the doubt, and more.

      • pterodactyl
        pterodactyl says:

        I think you are mistaken here. This is an article that investigates why the West is committing national suicide. If you blame the Jews 100% for everything you will then not notice other causes of our decline – namely, the anti-white indigenous lefty whites, who also clearly hate the West and seek to bring us down.

        Some Jews might hold out the matches and suggest we should burn down our house, but in the end it is up to us whether we (ie Western countries, like Finland) do so, and this article seeks to explain why we gladly take the matches and start the fires, rather than send them away. And, in my opinion, there are also plenty of lefty whites also holding out matches and suggesting we burn our house down just as the Jews do also – and these two groups offering us the matches are also in conflict with each other (over Palestine).

        The big question is how a country that has shown strong unity and nationalism in the past, like Finland, can switch to self-hatred and to voting for mass immigration, and this is still a very important question, irrespective of how much the Jews are contributing to this process. Whether the Jews contribute 10% or 100% (as many readers here seem to believe), nevertheless there is something in the makeup of the white population that makes this message of self-destruction acceptable instead of being very strongly rejected (as it is by readers of this blog).

        Even if you think Jews are 100% responsible for Western self-destruction, they must be tapping into some aspects of behaviour that are in the animal behaviour side of the white population, for example, you could never persuade Africans to self-hate.

        If you look at white-hating Twitter comments they are not all Jews, there are plenty of white-hating whites. There was a crowd at the weekend in London of a few hundred thousand who want Britain to be ruled from abroad by foreigners (the EU). These white-hating traitors were not all Jews – they were mainly gentiles and almost all were white. You need to explain this and blaming the Jews for everything is not sufficient.

        • Richard B
          Richard B says:

          “I think you are mistaken here. This is an article that investigates why the West is committing national suicide.”

          Actually, I think you’re mistaken. My comment was in response to Rerevisionist’s comment about there being no mention of Jews, and that this is something that some commenters here have been noticing lately.

          “If you blame the Jews 100% for everything you will then not notice other causes of our decline – namely, the anti-white indigenous lefty whites, who also clearly hate the West and seek to bring us down.”

          Your’e comment is a response to your own assumption. Not to anything I think or anything I’ve written here at TOO.

          In fact, I agree with some of what you wrote.

          I have commented often here, and not just here, about how those of us who visit these sites and are concerned about what’s going on would do well to read up on Family Systems.

          Because the whole structure of a dysfunctional family fits the template of what Jewish Supremacy is imposing on the Western world.

          This is important because it helps us understand our involvement, ie; how we make it so easy for them.

          Many White families have a structure that goes like this.

          Sacred Cow Narcissistic Parent who can do no wrong (Jewish Supremacy Inc.).

          Golden Child: The Narc Parent’s Mini-Me (All Non-Whites, or, Minority Supremacy).

          Flying Monkey Siblings: Who all blindly obey the Narc Parent and Golden Child and fight each other for scraps from the table of approval (All Whites (not just White Lefties) who grovel at the feet of Jewish Supremacy Inc and Minority Supremacy so they can continue to cling to their what they’ve got while gleefully throwing the self-respecting Whites who won’t comply under the bus).

          The Designated Scapegoat who can do no right (the self respecting Whites who won’t comply, who know what the Sacred Cow is up to and is willing to call them out).

          It’s also worth pointing out that, in terms of the shamefully neglected subject of Cultural History, Jews literally invented the concept of the Scapegoat.

          Anyway, while it is true, and important, to understand the part that Whites play in all of this, that involvement is inseparable from what it is they’re involved in, ie; the hostile takeover of the Western world by Jewish Supremacy.

          • pterodactyl
            pterodactyl says:

            @Richard B – fair enough, & good analogy especially the Sacred Cow Narcissistic Parent and the Golden Child, and I would add that it is impossible for Trump to take on such a powerful ‘parent’ & the Right need to give him a break here when he fails to do so.

            This article is about the downfall of the West and the causes, including the way the animal side of human behaviour makes us co-operate with our downfall. This is a very important question, and I am sure the reviewer would have mentioned the role of the Jews if the author had done so. We must have serious flaws in the West in our genes in order to fully co-operate with our own demise, and if a book helps to explain this it is highly relevant to this site.

            There is also another advantage to having articles that do not *have to* mention Jews, if the purpose is to convert the normies as opposed to preaching to the converted. Let people read this entire article, then click on another. When I mention links to ‘Red Ice’ I never mention nationalism, I link to the interview about white people in the US predating the ‘Native Americans’.

            It is like if you are a baker and you want people to taste your wonderful plum cakes as you know that once they have tasted one they will be addicted for life. Would you (a) only sell plum cakes in your shop (b) sell a variety of cakes and now and again push your plum cake to the front of the counter?

            If you choose (a) there are a lot of people who will walk straight past the shop.

            An example of this is when we retweet on Twitter. I tend to not retweet a post that directly mentions the Jews, but when someone like K MacDonald is posting on Twitter about something else, I will retweet him then, so people read more for themselves. I know that if I just Tweet posts pointing out J involvement, then ppl will ignore my posts and place me in the category of ‘obsessed about Js’ This is probably because ‘normies’ see Js as an oppressed and civilised white minority, and take great offence on their behalf if you criticise them They have no idea that these ‘custodians of the Holy Lands’ devote so much time and effort and money and influence into making the West diverse. If they did realise this they would be very angry, but they are kept in the dark. If we switch on the lights too quickly the just leave the room.

      • Charles Frey
        Charles Frey says:

        RB, what’s the exact takeaway between your first sentence and your last ones ? The inference is a degree of warranted implied mistrust of TOO: its head and staff.

        With the exception of child abuse, there is nothing more despicable than bearing false witness in the absence of proof. An undeserved backhanded slap across the face: worthy of reciprocity.

        Why would any sane person attempt to improve on Solzhenitsyn on 1917, or needlessly regurgitate the creation of the Fed. Enough with sowing doubt; even by the milligram.

        High time, that Rerevisionist turn the worn page in his hymnal.

        ” There is NO QUESTION AT ALL about KM’s courage and honesty [!] “. ” So I think they deserve the BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT, and more [!] “. What sort of untreated sewage is this ” thinking ” ?

        Get a text on Elementary Logic !

        • Richard B
          Richard B says:

          Charles Frey

          “The inference is a degree of warranted implied mistrust of TOO: its head and staff.”

          What poorly written sentence. Anyone who writes that badly is in no position to bark at someone else about logic.

          In any event, I’m not responsible for your inferences.

  4. Bob Matthews
    Bob Matthews says:

    Interesting article, although to inaccurately claim that 10 percent of Finns are of “Mongoloid” descent is laughable to say the least, I think you must be referring to the “Sami” or “Lap” people – not the average Finnish person! I notice also the “plugging” of multimillionaire and counter jewhadist the scumbag “Tommy Robinson”, whilst at the same time failing to mention the banning of the Finnish division of the NRM – who have been far more successful in trying to wake up the Finnish populace! Why is that I may ask – because they are National Socialist’s? I don’t mean to be rude, however it would appear that so-called PHD’s are not worth the paper they are printed on these days!

    • pterodactyl
      pterodactyl says:

      @Bob Mathews – your attitude is what keeps the Alt-R small and stops it growing, and by this I mean the way that many who think as you do alienate and act hostile to those such as Tommy Robinson – who is single-handedly awakening more people in his country and putting them on the path to the Right than anyone else. He is taking Labour voters and turning them into voters who vote for the Right (like UKIP). And meanwhile, your reaction to him is to put people off the Right and therefore hindering them on their journey to the right.

      You have antennae that are only tuned in to one thing – Jews – and do you know what impression this creates amongst ‘normies’? It makes you look like a conspiracy theorist, and it makes you look ignorant as if you think the whole world is that simple and there is only one villain. In short – it puts people off the Alt-R and off nationalism.

      If I were working for the communists or any enemy of white people, this would be my tactic – to pretend to be on the Right and then accuse our own best people of being the enemy, and thus causing the Right to turn on itself. Some bright sparks in the ‘Far-right’ even made threats of violence against TR’s mother, then they wonder why he is now hostile to them. Their public relations director needs sacking.

      Here is ‘wolf age’ on Red Ice TV explaining why the Alt-R should support Tommy Robinson:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MjAYoJRVA20

      What you have to realise is that there are many people who are sympathetic to the Jews, and this is not because they secretly work for Mossad (did you yourself work for Mossad earlier on in your life when you were at the same stage in the journey that TR is?). It is because they see the Jews are a small white country under attack from the same enemies as the rest of the West is. This is actually true apart from the ‘white’ part, so why should decent people not support the Jews based on this level of awareness? And then another reason for decent people to support the Jews is the observation that the Left are hostile to the Jews over the Palestine issue, and the Jews are never allowed to present their side of this argument on TV, which is biased against them on this issue. I certainly did support the Jews until I read a single comment that said ‘Kevin MacDonald gets it” and looked him up. Before that I had read loads of comments like yours and this put me off the Right as it made you look ignorant by having a single explanation for all the world’s problems.

  5. Neil C
    Neil C says:

    A very good essay, yes. I remember seeing a few Finns at Rosskilde festival, they seemed quite gloomy and someone (Maybe one of the Finns) said they have a big problem with Alcoholism. I did think when reading the start of this essay ”hmmn the Finns were great Fighters though” So I must be thinking on the right track.
    Someone said recently ”It is all about birth rates” and it got me to thinking about the shrinkage of western peoples, If we become smaller will we become more ethnocentric like the Jews ? is it time we lopped off the dead wood? we are becoming Fat and Idle.
    Anyway, that is what I have been thinking on and this essay is very interesting in that sense.

  6. White Gene
    White Gene says:

    Hello great site
    I have read about the rapes in another blog “Darkmon me” i believe its called and i am sorry to hear this.
    I write from southamerica where i live with my wife and children.
    Darkmoon me i left because thye administration there plays too many games and there are too many sock puppet acounts; its horrible.
    I like the occidental observer.
    thanks

  7. Charlie
    Charlie says:

    Italy had no “Anti-Rape” policy when the Moors of Spain invaded Sicily. The Moors did so much raping of the Native Aryan Italians that they permanently altered the genetics of Sicilians to have African DNA as one of the predominant genetics contained in their DNA. This had led to the dark skin, dark eyes and dark hair to replace the genetics of Northern Italians. To date there has been no suits brought against Africans or Spain for the War Crimes and Rape Crimes of the Moors.

  8. pterodactyl
    pterodactyl says:

    “In short, the Finns behaved like the schizophrenic who imagined a moderately irritated man was out to kill him”

    Schizophrenia is not an indicator of enhanced empathy, quite the opposite, it is an indication of an inability to interpret the world around you, ie simply lacking some mental abilities.

    And autism is not primarily a lack of empathy, as if it was this, then the autistic person
    would know that he had upset you but would not care. In fact he simply does not know he has upset you. There are people who have zero empathy but are not anywhere near being autistic.

    “by the 1990s, espousing Multiculturalism. By the time I came to Finland, the attitude of the kind of people who work for Oulu City Council was that Oulu should ‘internationalise.’

    This demonstrates that a certain type has gravitated to these political roles. The people in the council have not got new genes or changed genes, their type have always been in the population, but spread out as tinkers and tailors and soldiers and sailors (mainly spread out working on the land). In the past there was no way they could end up in positions of authority.

    Modern democracy and wealth have allowed people to choose their role as opposed to having it given to them. And the left choose these political roles, in fact any role where they can ‘think’ and supervise and influence and scheme and change society to the way they want it, as opposed to being forced to do jobs where they have to make stuff or work on the land. In prehistoric times, their type would have spent their time scheming and planning how to rape and steal other people’s things, and today today they scheme and plan how to destroy that which they hate – their own societies. In prehistoric times they had antagonism from their genes towards the peaceful and co-operative farmers that they parasited on, and this anatagonism enabled them to do all their stealing and killing without any troubled consciences, and today the same antagonsim towards the better is wired into their behavour, and it manifests itself as hostility to better people – their own race.

    “This has been caused by the relaxing of Darwinian selection consequent upon the country’s recent prosperity. He notes that maladaptive ideas tend to originate among social elites less subject to selective pressures than working people.”

    Perhaps the gene pool has not actually changed at all, but certain subgroups have moved into positions of power. Imagine an ant colony with a queen, workers, soldiers, and saboteurs (a new type of ant). The colony gets on very well while the saboteurs are forced to join the soldiers or the workers. But one day the rules of the colony are changed – perhaps the ants set up next to a hill made from sugar and no longer have to work or fight. Then the saboteurs are able to form their own group, and take over. But overall the gene pool remains unchanged. Once they take over, they destroy the colony.
    Modern wealth and democracy has changed the criteria for selecting who rises to wealth & power, and this has favoured the lefty-wired to gravitate to positions of power and influence.

  9. ValHalla
    ValHalla says:

    Note from Finland.

    Our country is, like all white countries, attacked by cultural marxists and Jews.

    There is no difference nowadays between left, right and center regarding politics. They are all the same, the only difference is which face will betray the country and the people.

    A typical right-wing politician (like Alexander Stubb) will sell his country and his fellow countrymen for his own personal gain. That is repeated in every level of the society. Men and women of the so-called elite always adjust their “politics” to suit the globalist agenda. Left does not anymore have any interest in the working class, right has no interest to defend Fatherland, they sell it to get points from the globalist elite.

    But, I can tell you, my friends, that the hate is growing, the fire is burning in the hearts of the people and, most promisingly in the hearts of young people as well. Never before could one read young people talking about “the change of population” due to mass migration. Now earlier unknown things are mentioned, every day.

    I meet a lot of people in my work, young and old, and there is hate. We are not the easiest to provocate but now the words “civil war” and “guns, we need guns”, is said openly and without shame.

    Finland may be one of the countries which may even survive this, because our national army, our own young men, will not direct their guns against their own people. That is why it is good that the elite cannot at this moment get us into NATO. NATO would bring foreign troops to shoot at our people.

    There will be, for sure, here as in all white countries, a civil war, we have had it 100 years ago. We will have it again, and we will, our people, win our independence, again.

    • pterodactyl
      pterodactyl says:

      “Never before could one read young people talking about “the change of population” due to mass migration. Now earlier unknown things are mentioned, every day.”

      The left (and their allies) do not use good tactics and now that they are in control they are intensely provoking the young in particular, so there will be a reaction. The left were doing very well using slowly, slowly, but they just could not wait and decided to speed things up.

  10. Rerevisionist
    Rerevisionist says:

    Several people here have accused me and others of blaming jews 100% for the present situation, and variations on the theme.
    .
    I presume nobody actually says that; it’s just another timewasting diversion and distraction.
    .
    So few people understand the importance, and malice, of Jews. It’s absolutely essential to understand all this. That is Part 1 of the process.
    .
    But then part 2 is analysing collaborators with Jews, who could have got nowhere without bribery of some groups. Today, virtually all politicians are funded by Jews. So are most media ‘stars’. So are teachers and other ‘educators’. So are police, judges, immigration officials, police etc. These in fact aren’t difficult to understand: if they don’t do what they’re told, they lose their jobs.
    .
    ‘Charles Frey’ wrote ‘High time, that Rerevisionist turn the worn page in his hymnal.’ I.e presumably he want people not to dscuss Jewish power. ‘Pterodactyl’ seems to be saying lots of people blame the Jews 100%. It’s like saying that people under a conquered regime who are forced to carry out actions they dislike are part of national suicide. Before Jewish power dominated, nobody went around saying they wanted to be replaced by savages.

    • pterodactyl
      pterodactyl says:

      @rerevisionist
      I do not wish to underestimate or minimise the contribution Jews make to our downfall, but I differ from many here in that in my opinion our national suicide would still proceed without their ‘help’. In my opinion there are two enemies, hostile Jews and hostile indigenous (Properly hostile ones, not just students being like sheep). We will never have peace in the West until both are recognised.

      Another thing I think is incorrect is that these two groups are hostile because there is something in it for them from this strategy. Another explanation is that they are just wired to be like this even if it is bad for them in the long run, but perhaps might have been an advantage in a more prehistoric setting – to hate other tribes in the case of the Jews, and to hate better people in the case of white lefties, who would in previous times would not be ‘socialists’ but would have been be ‘takers’ as opposed to ‘makers’.

      If you look on Twitter comments there are many examples of ‘unimportant’ white people who are not teachers or have any significant job and cannot be said to be controlled, but they are full of hate for anyone they see as a white representative, such as Trump. Such levels of hate cannot all be orchestrated or whipped up and some/most must come from their own natures.

      You said that before Jewish power dominated, nobody went around saying they wanted to be replaced by savages, but there have been many times in history when Jews did dominate and this did not cause the response in the past of ‘we want to invite savages over’ or, to put it another way, ‘we want to destroy our society’. This is only a recent development. I assume that in the past the people did recognise that the Jews were causing them problems, but were helpless to do anything about it as the Jews had high connections with the rulers, but these days most people are simply unaware that the Jews are causing any problems at all, and it is only the internet that is gradually waking people up on this point. If the current level of partial internet freedom continues, more and more will continue to wake up.

      What is different now and in the past is that (a) we are very wealthy in the West and all our material needs are met, so our minds are not focused on the need to form groups to get these things – we get them anyway, in abundance (b) We have technology and this allows the keen 10% to dominate the other 90% with their views.

  11. Stan Burns
    Stan Burns says:

    In my opinion, anyone who attempts to allow non-Whites to enter a White country is guilty of treason. In my opinion, the appropriate penalty for treason is death.

    “Black Panther Quanell X … blamed the 11-year-old girl for being raped by 28 black males.”
    https://archive.org/details/nolies

    Quotes from the Finn Kai Murros:

    You, who wasted your chance, you, who were corrupted and whose souls were bought, do not try to teach us, for goats cannot teach lions.

    This is war, and our greatest enemy is the enemy within: the submissive, apologetic, guilt-ridden, self-hating drone. The moment we manage to destroy the enemy within, destroying the rest of our enemies will be a walk in the park.

    This is Europe’s answer: those who wanted to undo us will face a total and uncompromising war of destruction.

Comments are closed.