The End of American Empire?

From Republic to Empire

America began life not as a democracy, but as an “aristocratic” republic. Under this model of elite governance, also known as federalism, civic participation was restricted to propertied White males. The basis for this particular exclusion was traditional English jurisprudence, which maintained autonomous agency was not possible without ownership of property. John Adams, a prominent Federalist, spoke for the majority of American Founding Fathers when he wrote:

“Such is the frailty of the human heart that very few men who have no property, have any judgment of their own. They talk and vote as they are directed by some man of property, who has attached their minds to his interest …. [They are] to all intents and purposes as much dependent upon others, who will please to feed, clothe, and employ them, as women are upon their husbands, or children on their parents.”[i]

The Federalists were defeated in the presidential election of 1800 by the Democratic-Republicans, who ushered in the age of Jeffersonian democracy. There were more White males who had been accorded full suffrage in 1824, which saw the end of Jeffersonian democracy, than in 1800, when it began. The mid-1820s witnessed the dissolution of the Democratic-Republicans and the growth of the highly influential movement for Jacksonian democracy, which opposed the continued disenfranchisement of non-propertied White males. During the 1840s and 1850s, the movement continued to gather momentum until by 1860, White male suffrage was recognized in all 33 states of the American union. In the aftermath of the Civil War, male suffrage was further expanded to include Blacks. The effect of the new legislation was mitigated by post-Reconstruction state governments, which used grandfather clauses and literacy tests to keep Blacks away from the polls.

Women were accorded full suffrage in 1919, another watershed in American history. This would have far reaching consequences for contemporary US politics. Female suffrage would shift electoral voting patterns in a more leftward direction.[ii] The next piece of momentous legislation was the Civil Rights Act, passed in 1964, which dismantled racial segregation in the South, putting an end to freedom of association. Barry Goldwater, who opposed the Civil Rights Act because it violated states’ rights, lost the 1964 election to Lyndon Johnson, the architect of the modern American welfare state. In 1965, Congress passed the Immigration and Nationality Act, delivering the final death knell to what was left of the old republic.

Meanwhile, decolonization had begun in 1945. This period of turmoil witnessed the emergence of independence movements and guerrilla insurgencies across the Third World, all of them agitating for the full evacuation of colonial personnel. In response, European metropoles dismantled their colonial empires, having lost the will to govern them after years of fighting in Europe and the Pacific.

Having abandoned their Third World outposts, the West’s deracinated and Judaized elites decided among themselves to transform their own nations into empires. This would be achieved by importing large numbers of migrants from Third World countries to live under a single sovereign authority. In the years since passage of the 1965 immigration act, America would place herself on a similar trajectory.

The Curse of Diversity

Once a nation embarks on a path to imperial hegemony, i.e., to become a multicultural, multiracial cesspool like Alexander’s Macedon, ancient Rome and Hapsburg Austria, its fate is already sealed in blood. Far from being an exception in this regard, the United States is representative of the problems that come with having a racially heterogeneous population. Indeed, racial conflict has been interwoven into the fabric of American history since the arrival of the first English settlers in 1607.

We must look to human biology to understand why diversity always fails. The separate evolutionary histories of each human race, which inhabited different ecological niches for thousands of years, entails average differences in intelligence and temperament between populations. This makes conflict inevitable when racial groups must live together under a single roof. As far as human relations are concerned, the greater the diversity, the greater the severity of the ensuing conflict. If group differences are too wide, the prospect for internal stability is diminished considerably.

In America, immigration policy has increased the potential for race conflict. The most destructive wave of mass migration so far, the post-1965 mass Third World immigration, would not have been possible without the mass European migration of 1880 to 1924, which brought inter-ethnic conflict, of the kind well-documented in the Culture of Critique, to American shores. As a result, there has been large-scale erosion of social cohesion in towns and cities across America. What was once a homogeneous ethno-racial community, a nation, is now the location of the world’s largest marketplace.

Without any social glue to hold America together, government must step in and resort to micromanagement of its citizens’ personal lives. By directly managing diversity, bureaucratic elites do their best to prevent America from exploding like a powder keg. Traditionally, management of diversity entailed maintaining the boundaries that separated whole neighborhoods, cities, regions and even nations largely populated by a single ethnic or racial group. For example, in America, segregation in the South and the tribal reservation system were meant to diffuse and manage the race problem. Soviet “multiculturalism” wasn’t integration of ethnicities, but a federal model that respected the ethnic diversity within each of its autonomous regions and socialist republics.

These days, American elites go against the conventional wisdom by forcibly integrating their own citizens, regardless of racial and ethnic differences. Since diversification is forced, limits must be imposed on freedom of speech to manage diversity. These are enforced by means of social ostracism and economic sanction. Critics of diversity have been deplatformed, fired from their jobs or have had their books removed from general circulation. As the high-profile case of James Watson demonstrates, even so much as expressing dissident views on race and intelligence in modern-day America can ruin careers and turn celebrities into virtual non-entities overnight.[iii] Multiculturalists, in their desire to create a nondiscriminatory and egalitarian society, have created an environment where the easily offended can dictate their own agendas with impunity.

The traditional Western canon is among the first casualties of political correctness, having been marginalized on colleges and universities across America in favor of gender and ethnic studies. Apparently, the achievements of the Western canon tower so highly above the achievements of other peoples and nations they must be slowly forgotten or attributed to some other racial or ethnic group, otherwise post-modern beliefs about cultural relativity wouldn’t be credible. Sometimes, the marginalization of the Western canon can be quite dramatic. The ongoing controversy over Mark Twain’s Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is a shining example of the excesses of political correctness. This classic work of fiction has been subject to outright bans and expurgation, all because it uses the word nigger some 213 times.[iv]

Not only must the Western canon be replaced, but certain fields of inquiry are declared verboten, all in the name of managing diversity. Since World War II, academia has aggressively marginalized scientific researchers who have refused to adhere to the ideology of political correctness. Anyone who conducts research in a field deemed off-limits by political correctness can expect no financial support from the universities and colleges. For example, if not for the Pioneer Fund, an alternative source of funding for dissidents, the famous Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study (MISTRA), one of the most important studies ever conducted on race and intelligence, would never have gotten off the ground.

The limiting of public discourse to politically correct discourse and only politically correct discourse will make society weaker in the long-run:

First, political correctness impoverishes American culture by ensuring art and literature do not violate multicultural orthodoxy, with violators marginalized and treated with oppobrium. A similar, but more extreme situation existed in the Soviet Union, where socialist realism was imposed on artists and writers by government officials. This not only suppressed individual creativity, but perpetuated the wealth and power of the ruling communist party. With few exceptions, the art and literature churned out by Soviet literati were bland, utilitarian, propagandistic and kitschy. The regime of political correctness in America has had a similar effect on contemporary American art and literature, without any of the pretensions to neoclassicism. Clearly then, creativity cannot flourish in an environment where racial hypersensitivity and racial orthodoxy are the norm.

Second, political correctness makes America less stable politically. Dissidents will be forced underground, where they will continue to undermine the stability of the multicultural order as they challenge it from within. If the ideas are credible and reach a large audience—which they will because political correctness is intellectually vacuous—the elite narrative will be threatened. But as a consequence, political repression will increase in severity. If ideas must be suppressed in the name of diversity, their supporters will have to seek other, more clandestine avenues to get their message across. Continued repression will inevitably lead to further unrest.

As JFK once said: “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.”

The Future of the American Empire?

When queried about the new American government, Benjamin Franklin said: “A republic … if you can keep it.” There was uncertainty as to whether the political arrangement agreed upon by the Constitutional Convention of 1787 would continue indefinitely. By the 1790s, there were already signs the new arrangement was beginning to unravel; by the mid-1960s, the spread of universal suffrage had forever consigned the nation’s republican institutions to the trash bin; by the early 2000s, America was a burgeoning imperial colossus, but one that strode the world with feet of clay.

The mass immigration that has played an instrumental role in America’s rise to imperial status has turned American culture into one that worships death. Death, both racial and cultural, permeates American culture and society to the extent it has become ubiquitous; Western borders are porous; state propaganda encourages Third World colonization; miscegenation and antinatalism are everywhere promoted among Whites; and racial integration is considered the normative ideal. By handing over their major financial and administrative centers to non-Whites, Whites are gradually ceding power and control to a growing and increasingly hostile class of imported serfs. In other words, Whites are committing race suicide, while giving non-Whites the means to destroy them when they become powerless minorities in their own racial homelands.

Is America destined to end up “… in fragments, forgotten … in ruins, like old Memphis and Babylon,” as prophesied by Oswald Spengler in Man and Technics?

What happened to Rome during the fourth to fifth centuries is similar to what is going on right now in modern-day America. After the Punic and Macedonian wars, which paved the way for Roman political and military ascendancy in the Mediterranean, the same moral degeneracy affecting modern-day Americans had set in, to rot the empire from within; birth rates fell; cosmopolitanism thrived; high culture declined; foreigners replaced citizens in the main urban centers[v],[vi]; government positions were occupied by foreigners and the defense of the nation was entrusted to foreign mercenaries. In short, the Roman polis had become a cosmopolis, much like modern-day America, everywhere unworkable because people are local, not global in their attachments.

The collapse of Rome is a warning to America—a warning that will, of course, go unheeded. If the ethno-racial differences between Near Easterners and North Africans, Germanic tribesmen and Italian plebeians—small though they were—were enough to cause social and political instability in Roman imperial times, the even more racially divergent Third World colonization will be much, much worse when the time comes for the indigenous populations of the West to finally surrender all political and economic power to the newcomers.

While Spengler did not foresee America’s transformation into a multicultural, globalist empire, he was right that the West’s future would eventually be decided by race. Given the fate of all empires, the passivity of Whites in the face of their own demise, and the vicious avarice of globalist elites, we can be certain race will be America’s undoing.

[i]“Founders Online: From John Adams to James Sullivan, 26 May 1776.” Founders.Archives.Gov,

[ii]Lott, John R. “How Dramatically Did Women’s Suffrage Change the Size and Scope of Government?” SSRN Electronic Journal, 1999,, 10.2139/ssrn.160530.

[iii]“DNA Pioneer Loses Honours over Race Claims.” BBC News, 13 Jan. 2019,

[iv]Page, Benedicte. “New Huckleberry Finn Edition Censors ‘n-Word.’” The Guardian, 5 Jan. 2011, ‌

[v]Frank, Tenney. “Race Mixture in the Roman Empire.” The American Historical Review, vol. 21, no. 4, July 1916, p. 689, 10.2307/1835889.

[vi]Antonio, Margaret L., et al. “Ancient Rome: A Genetic Crossroads of Europe and the Mediterranean.” Science, vol. 366, no. 6466, 7 Nov. 2019, pp. 708–714,, 10.1126/science.aay6826.

78 replies
  1. Rerevisionist
    Rerevisionist says:

    You haven’t mentioned the leading part taken by Jews in all this. Perhaps you don’t know about it. Perhaps you’re too lazy to find out. The article, exclusively talking of ‘Americans’, is worthless.

    • Kevin MacDonald
      Kevin MacDonald says:

      It says: “Having abandoned their Third World outposts, the West’s deracinated and Judaized elites decided among themselves to transform their own nations into empires.”

      • Rerevisionist
        Rerevisionist says:

        The ‘elites’ were not ‘judaized’. Jews were a separate, hostile, secret, independent elite, pursuing its own policies internationally, passing information and money between their multinational bases, and aggressively censoring and lying. The entire article fails to recognise this. It’s like saying a body infested with cancer pursued its policy, but without noting those parts are in fact different. This entire site is supposed to explore just such Jewish influence.
        The comparisons with the collapse of Rome are of course worryingly close. But I doubt if one single paid ‘expert’ on Rome (and Jewish Christianity) is allowed to draw attention to Jewish influence in its full impact.

        • Eric
          Eric says:

          The British aristocracy intermarried with Jews during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

          Oliver Cromwell allowed the Jews back into England around 1651 after receiving a petition from Menasseh ben Israel explaining how profitable it could be for goy rulers to have the Jews on their side.

          Rockefeller and Morgan established their businesses using Jewish money.

          Woodrow Wilson was a puppet of the Jews Paul Warburg, Jacob Schiff, Henry Morgenthau, Jr., Samuel Untermeyer, Felix Frankfurter, Bernard Baruch, Louis Brandeis and Louis Marshall.

          Many more examples of goy rulers allying themselves with Jews could be given, going back for centuries and extending up to the present day. Those alliances have always been at the expense of the common man. which is why there have been so many uprisings against the Jews.

          The elites certainly have been Judaized. If not by mixing their blood with them (as in the case of the British aristocracy — and the Trump family), then by doing what the Jews want and being rewarded for it financially.

          • Rerevisionist
            Rerevisionist says:

            You’re managing to miss the point. In the USA there is NOT an anglo-elite that’s ‘judiaed’. The elite is Jewish; perhaps there’s a remnant of an old elite – if it ever existed – which was anglo. Maybe there are two elites, in fact. is it that difficult?

          • Rerevisionist
            Rerevisionist says:

            Yes, correct. Hilaire Belloc said much the same. (So does Miles Mathis). But you’re assuming the ‘elite’ is basically the same as what it was supposed to be, but somewhat tweaked and modified. I’m saying the whole idea of the elite being basically old stock is wrong. They’re replaced, in the same way the British ‘royal family’ is a collection of puppets (who also are stupid, perhaps necessarily.

          • Eric
            Eric says:

            Sorry. Trump, the Bushes, the Clintons, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson, Kennedy, Eisenhower, Truman, FDR, Hoover, Harding, Coolidge, Taft, Wilson, Teddy Roosevelt, McKinley — not Jewish. Pence, Biden, Cheney, Gore, Quayle, etc., not Jewish. The great majority of the U.S. Senate and House — not Jewish.

            Our presidents, vice-presidents, senators and representatives have mostly not been Jews. They have mostly been WASPs who have done what the Jews have told them to do. I gather the same would be true in Britain, which has a smaller percentage of Jews than the U.S.

            At 2% of the U.S. population, the Jews have managed to become about 25% of the overall “elite” in our leading universities, our major corporate and banking leadership, and our millionaire and billionaire class. They have become an even higher percentage of leading figures in social media, mainstream media, publishing and Hollywood.

            But they still have to rely on a Judaized elite of non-Jews (mostly WASPs, but Catholics as well) to get what they want. Their main method of control is money. Congress is owned lock, stock and barrel by AIPAC. That’s probably the most obvious example.

          • Lee
            Lee says:

            Eric, I do not know if you are a bitter, anti-Anglo-Saxon Irishman, Slav or whatever else, but your contumelious characterization of the American elite as being constituted by flagitious “WASPs” is intellectually indefensible. I have come across a superfluity of drones who evomit a type of despiteous anti-Anglo-Saxon discourse and, heretofore, I have dismissed it as the exercitation of resentment and impudicity, so familiar to the post-WWII world. Tell me, wherefore do you – or whosoever is reading this with an anti-Anglo pathos – inculpate “WASPs” with whatever villainy being discussed? Moreover, are you anti-Anglo activists cognizant of the extenuatory effect your impugnations have for the benefit of the veridical elites in the 21st century West? For a conclusory remark, I must inform you that Trump and Clinton are not Anglo-Saxons, but are Scotch/Irish with a touch of this or that; moreover, the children of these pachydermatous philo-semites have all formed exogamous unions with wealthy, privileged, and invulnerable jews. In addition, the preponderance of the men you have delineated as “WASPs” are not even of English origin. And Kennedy – are you serious? From the Irish Kennedy family whose profligate sons have destroyed America? Tell yourself “sorry,” and devote yourself to a more thorough investigative effort before proffering your “WASPs” to us, Eric.

          • Eric
            Eric says:

            Lee: “Trump and Clinton are not Anglo-Saxons.” Did I say they were? No, I didn’t. I said that they weren’t Jews.

            Did I say that Kennedy was a WASP? No, I didn’t. I said is that he wasn’t a Jew.

            Who did I call “mostly WASPs”? All of America’s presidents, vice-presidents, senators and representatives. That covers a lot of people, going right back to the founding. I stand by that statement.

            Instead of trying to impress people with your extensive vocabulary, I advise you to pay closer attention to what people actually say.

    • End
      End says:

      (Mod. Note: “End”, TOO prefers comments which address the topic of the article. We tend to not approve comments which only express “ire” at another commenter.)

      • Charles Frey
        Charles Frey says:

        If my clairvoyance is sufficiently lubricated this morning, this END has been breached thrice previously: for the same “ires”. Look for the new handle ” Back for the Fourth Time” !

        ” Only your hairdresser knows ! ” [ whether you use MISS CLAIROL ROOT TOUCHUP ], and I would never ask.

    • Joe
      Joe says:

      Yes. None of the decay of the original American nation would have occurred without the presence and influence of the jew. NONE. We can only imagine what the country would be like today were it homogeneous and morally sound. The same thought experiment goes with Europe. Had the Germans won WWII, the heights of the continent’s collective potential would be realized. Instead, ALL Western nations today suffer in a dystopian fog of mediocrity, corruption and moral rot.

      And the jew wrings its hands.

    • Leon Haller
      Leon Haller says:

      What the author did leave out of this otherwise excellent summary of the white man’s decline is the role of the white-created Third World Population Explosion now washing over and away the West. “Idealistic” whites never think about the intergenerational effects of their stupid sentimental humanitarianism.

  2. Harbinger
    Harbinger says:

    Those aboard the Mayflower may very well have had good intentions, leaving England to escape feudalism, in 1620 (the Jews were still under expulsion) but there’s no doubt, whatsoever that the founding fathers, 150 years later, simply played their role in the creation of, what would become, imperial America in the signing of the Declaration of Independence.

    All of them were freemasons and as many on here will know, freemasonry is esoterically known as “talmudism for the goyim”. Simply put, America, by then, was already under the heavy control of international freemasonry (Jewry) and already well on its course to becoming the guinea pig to being the first, globalist state – a land of multi-cultures and multi-races.

    I look at the situation in American no differently to how I look at any supermarket (Jewish), here in the UK, when setting up shop inside a city. In the past, local councils used to deem that it supermarkets had to remain on the outskirts, in order that smaller businesses thrive in city centres, but that was all changed 30 or so years ago, most certainly by corrupt government officials, along with local councilors and cash filled, brown paper envelopes in back pockets. They’ll move in, lower the prices, offer everyone great deals. In doing so, they get a lot of custom and take business away from independent shops, who then close.
    What’s this got to do with America? Well, they give you the republic and a constitution (cheap prices) knowing full well that they’re going to be turning your society into a globalist state and removing it (hike in prices).

    The Trans Atlantic Slave Trade was also very much planned. It killed two birds with one stone – a hell of a lot of profit for the Jew, (who created it, owned the slave auctions, slave ships, slave crews and procured the most slaves) and of course, sewed the seeds for a future race war with the whites, which the Jew would again, play its part in the civil rights movement.

    Overall, America was doomed the minute the freemasons got their hands on things in the 18th century. Now it’s a case of simply sit back and do nothing and let America follow the course it was created for.

    • todd hupp
      todd hupp says:

      Freemasonry comes from occult teachings much more ancient than the Talmud. The vast majority of Freemasons have been – and are – WASPs since its founding in the UK. Washington and Lafayette are important Masonic figures. Both did oppose slavery on moral grounds. Yet African Americans were forced to form separate lodges based on race.

    • gerald robinson
      gerald robinson says:

      living in Bradford Harbinger and for nearly 60 years drumming on about the dangers that face us on mass immigration and the danger the Jews pose to us you are spot on. Just as London Birmingham and other cities we are now I believe a minority in Braford.

    • Eric
      Eric says:

      Yes. I think it’s fair to say that the United States was Jewish (Freemasonic) from the beginning. Meaning the rulers, not the people. The white Anglo and Catholic shills for Israel in Congress today (virtually all of them) are continuing a program put into place by the Founding Fathers. Freemasonry (the Grand Orient) was, in large part, the source of the French Revolution — which was the first Communist revolution.

      The Right vs. Left debate has been orchestrated ever since as a conflict between freedom (defined as capitalism plus some alleged rights that are routinely disregarded) and equality (defined as Communism). There has never been a serious battle between the two sides — it is all spectacle.

      The authentic Right does not place primary emphasis on freedom. Instead, it emphasizes tradition.

      Take, for example, the industrial revolution, which transformed England from an agrarian to an urban society, throwing most Englishmen into poverty and into total dependence on the whims of capitalists. No traditionalist — no true conservative — would have supported this.

      What have American conservatives conserved? Nothing. They are only slightly late to a party that is hosted by so-called progressives, but in which they are eager participants.

      China shows that capitalism and communism can take a hybrid form, one that is most pleasing to any would-be rulers.

      In the end, politics is about nothing other than the few finding ways to gain power over the many. They can do it through capitalism, Communism, or a hybrid of both. America and China are now mirror images of each other. America’s capitalism is crony capitalism, in which politicians are bought off by monied interests and the system is rigged in favor of those interests. At the same time, American corporations have embraced cultural Marxism — that is, political correctness, diversity, mass Third World immigration, discrimination against white males, white genocide, feminism, etc. — because there is no better way to defang a potential opposition that could only come from white people.

      China, on the other hand, is a straightforward Communist dictatorship, but one that has chosen to participate in the global marketplace.

      What is the difference between China and America when it comes to dealing with dissent? America squashes dissent through private monopolies. It is Facebook, Google and Twitter — and the Jewish dominated mainstream media — that do the dirty work. The government can say, “We didn’t do it.” But they did, by allowing these monopolies to exist, and by giving them privileged access to the airwaves and the internet.

      White people have no clue as to what is really going on. They learned a long time ago that they have no real say and it’s best to not even protest. Much more could be said, but these are just some thoughts that come to mind. .

  3. Gerry
    Gerry says:

    Why does the bible mention and prophesy the end of the world? Rather odd if one gets down to really thinking about it? And why? Surely it is because God knew the world of man was futile hence a promised Messiah to come and to save and man er Jews has gone off and even perverted rejected the greatest gift?

    What Pogo said is true of us, ‘we have found the enemy and he is us.’

  4. David Shiloh
    David Shiloh says:

    “Women were accorded full suffrage in 1919, another watershed in American history.”

    Yes and it was Edward L. Bernays, descended from the Chief Rabbi of Hamburg (late 18th-early 19th century) and was a nephew, both sides, of Sigmund Freud, who got the US males to vote FOR women voting. He is responsible for so much of the poisoning of American minds. For example, the “Consumer Society”.

    And Netflix CEO is a great nephew of Bernays and Freud – small wonder !

    Dr MacDonald said it quite starkly in I’m not optimistic about the future of the west, that things look very dark indeed.

    The problem is that the American male, meaning the white men, have lost their manhood. Chechens have not. The men of Hezbollah and like unto Qassem Soleimani, who was slaughtered by Trump, these are real men, with honor and courage and devoted to their people.

    While conservatives have swallowed all the views given by the enemy as they swallow all of the propaganda that is served up as “news” and “Enterainment” pushed about these men it is sad to see as they would be outstanding role models for the White male.
    Alas, white men are too busy following sports and looking for FUN and MONEY. That is not what a real man focuses on. This is little understood by today’s white community. Which little understood what was happening to them. So I might suggest that you relax because the end of the enemy is coming. God wills it.

    Peace, blessing and strength to all of the those that peruse Dr MacDonald’s site for the sake of adhering to righteousness.

    • ChilledBee
      ChilledBee says:

      “Alas, white men are too busy following sports and looking for FUN and MONEY. That is not what a real man focuses on”

      Let us not forget the 10’s of thousands of white men who are anaesthetizing themselves
      due to being surrounded by a world that they feel has nothing to offer them, due to the abject greed of the elites moving sacred jobs abroad, and the constant Jewish led propaganda telling them that white men are the cause of all that is bad in America.

      Naturally, the likes of the Sacker family were only too happy and too willing to facilitate this via their evil drug trade.

    • Gellero
      Gellero says:

      Eh….we do look down on Chechen/Muslim cultures to a degree with their weird boy/girl relationships. I don’t know if the more ‘enlightened’ Americans would want arranged marriages……let’s admit it…we have more fun than the sexually frustrated Muzzies

  5. Thomas Clark
    Thomas Clark says:

    Regarding empires yes the roman empire probably caused miscenegation, but it was also the constant attacks of arabs north africans and the like their occupation of greece, sicily and the like. Of course there was mixture even though the romans vere most of the time only allowed to marry other romans.

    The brittish empire did cause mass immigration because they had more or less open borders to former colonies for a time (I assume immigration was kept at the very minimum during most of the time they had an empire). Also the bringing of slaves to america and portugal has had an effect.

    But it would have been possible to run empires with a clear ethnocentric viewpoint. I.e. not letting immigrants from these countries in. The US up untill the mid 60’s was an empire due supposedly to the threat of communism, the US building the atom bomb, and the like. Yet it was fairly ethnocentric. I’m not shure it was the empire aspect that changed that probably other main reasons.

    Many people in political power are the result of hundreds of years of miscenegation. I.e. they have mixed background (many people in general have I suppose it varies in different regions with different backgrounds and percentages or whatever). Many people in mainstream media likewise, hence the common ground with the agendas of certain people of the jewish faith / larger cultural group.

  6. Thomas Clark
    Thomas Clark says:

    Also regarding women being able to wote actually in many european countries in the early 20th century vere more racist than men in general.

    Or etchnocentric.

    There was complaints by many women organizations (womens organizations social democratic womens organizations and the like) to the UN and many other organizations, to stop the “negro plague”, coming from mainly northafrican and african soldiers employed by the french in germany following WWI. They did not want racial mixture and so on.

    One may argue that the traditional roles of men shielding defending the family and group and so on and the women taking care of children and the like has led to women being more caring and hence more easily lured in to supporting the poor poor immigrants that need help.

    One may also argue that men tend to be more individualistic and women may be easier lured by propaganda and the such.

    In effect they have been lured by radical feminism (spread in media and at universities), not to start families and have children. Anyone who has in general seen women around babies know its their biological instinct to have cute little babies of their own come on…

    School the media and universities do not teach women that it’s harder to have kids after the age of 30 for starters.

    They are also lured by propaganda pieces such as “sex in the city” created and made by a gypsy arab jew, who is also homosexual. It portrays old women or oldeeer, likely too old to have children almost running around in luxury clothes and hanging around with gays, forever waiting years and years for a man that it doesnt seem to be happening with. Instead of getting out there and just finding a good man or whatever. In the defense of the creator of the show, the main character is acted by a woman that looks jewish, so it could also be seen as anti white/whiter jews having children, or it may be due to him being homosexual or the fact that many white women in NYC put their career before having children.

    It’s also an effect of massimmigration and desegregation. To be able to start a family in a relative safe manner in many larger cities you need to be rich hence women will go for the richest dudes, cause they canb afford not to live with africans and the like i.e. segreate themselves to some degree, and a decent living. With most affordable living spaces being occupied by other races, and not all women being able to marry the richi rich dudes, it probably takes away their will to have children, in many ways on an unconscios level. There is an amount of underlying adǵgression and hostility between races that is not fully comprehended by many whites yet they FEEL it.

    Its also an effect of how corporate america works supposedly and the constant competition from fresh of the boat non whites poc’s or whatever.

    So less non whites, cheaper living spaces (houses and apartments is needed).

    Also blacks could have like their own country maybe in the US where they could move and rule themselves and not be afraid of police violence and the like. I’m sure tons of them would.

  7. Tom
    Tom says:

    It seems clear to me that whites have already forsaken their specific genetic entitlements by abandoning their previous political ideals of life and liberty in favor of the illusion of the discrete equality of all mankind’s subgroups. By prostrating themselves to equality instead of life and liberty, they’ve also subconsciously accepted that all culture, art, folkways, and morality will hitherto be dictated by the emerging non-white majorities in western lands. We see this clearly at the very moment by the seeming overnight infusion of non-western cultural elements into the prior wholly European cultural landscape. The alien infusion, far from being resisted, is being encouraged by the egalitarian mythology of the west since whites themselves can sense their coming future displacement even though they may not be explicitly aware of such. When a people senses that they will eventually disappear genetically and physically, their specific cultural progress is abandoned in favor of a grovelling adaptation to the culture of those in the process of achieving demographic victory.

  8. Thomas Clark
    Thomas Clark says:

    Was slavery a plan, also turning the civil war into being about freeing the slaves hence a way of spreading the negro genetics among whites.

    A long plan of genocide.

    Someone mentioned the freemasons an organization with rites that mimmic to some extent pre judaic and christian beliefs in current israel and also nordic beliefs before christianity.

    Were they involved was someone a leader of them heavily racially mixed and wanted it for all? Quite possible but I suppose we will never know.

    I did notice the smirks on the north generals faces when signing the agreements after the american civil war… Finally they could let the negro run free… And most of them looked part jewish also although probably half jewish the most but who knows alot of people look a bit like that anyways… Just a theory.

    And also replacing a people making it hard for them to have children, supressing their culture or replacing it with other peoples cultures is like the defenition of an attempt at genocide. GEN-OCIDE

  9. todd hupp
    todd hupp says:

    Excellent piece. The real problem with diversity is perhaps the lower IQ of non European immigrants and American blacks. The overall average IQ of the USA and Europe is in decline. In contrast, the Asians and the Jews (in Israel) are preserving their relatively high average IQs. The USA, Canada and NW Europe are not. While the Jews promote multi culturalism for the USA they have become quite strict on genetic /IQ/ racial preservation in Israel – ironically much like the Nazi approach.

    GEORGE F. HELD says:

    “by the mid-1960s, the spread of universal suffrage had forever consigned the nation’s republican institutions to the trash bin”
    From Wikipedia (
    wiki/Timeline_of_women%27s_suffrage_in_the_United_States ):
    “1964: The Twenty-fourth Amendment is ratified by two-thirds of the states, formally abolishing poll taxes and literacy tests which were heavily used against African-American and poor white women and men.
    1965: The Voting Rights Act of 1965 strenuously prohibits racial discrimination in voting, resulting in greatly-increased voting by African American women and men.
    1966: Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections strikes down poll taxes at all levels of government.”
    A more important date than the 1960’s, however, is 1920:
    “1920: The Nineteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is ratified, stating:
    The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
    Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.”
    Women’s suffrage, in effect, killed the right to exclude anyone from the right to vote, i.e, the right to be choosy about who is permitted to vote. The slippery slope toward political chaos began decades before the ’60’s. Our goose was not cooked in 1920, but it was already then in the oven.

    • Rerevisionist
      Rerevisionist says:

      The article you link to (typical of pieces censored by Jews) says nothing about such issues as the Fed printing money and also being allowed to decide what to do with it. There are published documents between banks specifically colluding to suddenly withdraw credit, so farms and small businesses were suddenly insolvent. Meanwhile more or less unlimited propaganda was generated against Japan and later Germany, so war against Russia by Japan, and later war between Germany and Russians, were funded. No doubt the issues are complicated, but, here again, the Jewish role in ruining Americans has been omitted.

  11. Fenria
    Fenria says:

    So much of American history reads like, “How to take something incredible and totally mess it all up.” Nation destroying for dummies. From the greed that brought thousands of blacks here to do the jobs that yesteryear’s corporations didn’t want to pay white Americans to do, to the greed that still brings in slaves in the form of every penniless third worlder to once again do the jobs that today’s corporations don’t want to pay white Americans to do, the US is a never ending study in how to do the same nation destroying thing over and over again, giving little care if any to what results.

    Every bad decision has been made that could. After slavery, we kept all these surly, low IQ, angry blacks here instead of shipping them back home. Lincoln used them as cannon fodder, and then let them settle everywhere in the nation. We pretended we could control them with the 3/5th law. That failed. We pretended we could corral them with segregation. That failed. We pretended that suburban Levittowns would shield us from them and their increasing rampages. That failed. Today, we have an ever growing population of blacks who are angrier and angrier with each passing year, whipped up into a froth by jews whom we also let in with our classic misplaced sense of pity and social justice. Our only saving grace with blacks is that they appear to be too stupid and violent to breed into demographic replacement numbers. Not so with our current misguided cheap labor experiment in Latinos, who are quickly finishing the demographic destroying job that blacks couldn’t.

    We can go on and on. A post industrial society with no manufacturing sector which continues to import enormous amounts of labor level immigrants that it will never be able to employ and attempts to satiate them with welfare handouts. A society where no one builds or creates anything, but is expected to live on the meagerly wages of the service industry and spend their spare pennies bowing to the new Mammon of mass consumerism for spiritual satiation. How is something like this even supposed to stand the test of time? It’s asinine. A short term nation created by the greediest of short term thinkers. This is what happens when you basically laissez faire EVERYTHING. America is a dumpster fire. But then again, this is always the end result of naive democracy and rapacious capitalism.

    • Rerevisionist
      Rerevisionist says:

      Again, the role of Jews is omitted. Jews owned the slave ships and many of the slaves. Whether slaves were employed by corporations seems doubtful to me; for one thing they are notable for being not much use as employees. In more recent times, large numbers are unemployed, although the figures are concealed deliberately. Jews like running deficits, because they can charge more interest, and governments can’t just declare bankruptcy, at least yet. These facts are questionable and, in a competent worrld, would be seriosuly addressed. But it looks as though Jews force immigration through hostility and the desire to damage what might have been more successful societies. And they like poverty imposition; it seems 95% of Americans live from one payday to the next. These are not ‘bad decisions’. They are decisions made by a malevolent group to cause harm.

      • Trenchant
        Trenchant says:

        Laissez-faire is largely vestigial under today’s money-creation monopoly. The nation was subordinated to the bank a century ago.

  12. Sophie
    Sophie says:

    This is the best in-a-nutshell discourse I have read on what has happened to the lands that were, since ancient history, still the domain of the Whites in the 1950s. I think I guess correctly that the majority of the present-day world’s population was not even born at the time. White Europe, White North America, and White Argentina are now not even memories for most people. Is this reversable? Who might lead the effort to reverse it?

    The hugely successful arrival of Jacob Rees-Mogg on the English political scene was a study — of something: the return of England’s traditional ruling class? But, dear God, the English aristocracy is said to be 40% Jewish! I recently met a member of one of England’s oldest noble families. The family, and he personally, are still very wealthy. He had himself been married to a Jewess. His children are Jewish. He said he had thought until recently that ‘we’ (the aristocracy) ‘rule this country’. A thought occurred to him: ‘Are we (his family) Jewish?’ I stared at him in disbelief.

  13. m
    m says:

    “We must look to human biology to understand why diversity always fails…”

    One ought recognize a more subtle ground if one is going to frame a Spenglarian argument for cultural-civilizational decline. Spengler was never a strict bio-materialist in the sense of, say Darwin. His view of history was not ‘linear progressive’–evolutionary as it were, but rather was it a more traditional cyclical view. One where race was not bio-genetic but rather something tied to the land in symbiosis, something spiritual, almost magical (to use a rather loaded term). In fact, the most biological part of his thinking insisted that cultures themselves were organic, possessing their own not dissimilar ‘life cycles’.

    “What happened to Rome during the fourth to fifth centuries is similar to what is going on right now in modern-day America…”

    Civilizational decline, the collapse of empire–Rome and America, can be judged in ways similar. The ’causes’ are not unique. Yet for Spengler it is an effect of cyclical history.

    One related point: within a Spenglerian view there is no univocal idea of ‘the West’ from Greece onward. Spengler turned to architecture for examples– the mind responsible for a Doric column supporting a classical temple, and a Gothic buttress supporting a medieval cathedral underscores a spiritual difference underived from a biological taxon.

    “…the passivity of Whites in the face of their own demise, and the vicious avarice of globalist elites, we can be certain race will be America’s undoing.”

    The idea that if only ‘white’ folks banded together they could or would likely preserve their indigenous historical cultural heritage is an odd notion. In majority white enclaves one tends to find the most ‘liberal’ of thinking, a thinking that happily supports their own dispossession. The thing is, a majority of ‘whites’ just don’t see themselves as ‘white’, at least in a cohesive racial sense. They obviously are from a genetic standpoint, but at the same time they lack an integral ‘spiritual’ understanding of their racial being. It is not something biological that is missing.

    • Carolyn Yeager
      Carolyn Yeager says:

      “The idea that if only ‘white’ folks banded together they could or would likely preserve their indigenous historical cultural heritage is an odd notion. In majority white enclaves one tends to find the most ‘liberal’ of thinking, a thinking that happily supports their own dispossession. The thing is, a majority of ‘whites’ just don’t see themselves as ‘white’, at least in a cohesive racial sense. They obviously are from a genetic standpoint, but at the same time they lack an integral ‘spiritual’ understanding of their racial being. It is not something biological that is missing.”

      Excellent comment – and I liked the article too. It points to the truth that “White” as a total descriptor doesn’t mean much because there are cultural and spiritual differences in addition to skin color. The conflict-producing differences between eastern and western whites, or northern and southern whites is never discussed—because of ‘political correctness,’ the very thing considered our ruination by everyone here! Bardamu calls conflict suppression the reason for political correctness.

      The other point I want to make is to Joe’s comment above (May 24, 2020 at 6:38 am ), who said: “Had the Germans won WWII, the heights of the continent’s collective potential would be realized.” Of course no one responded. The overwhelming consensus here is that it’s good the Germans lost that war, and that only afterward did things go wrong for and between we “White” people. Even more, the bad outcome for “Whites” was the German Adolf Hitler’s fault because of his ‘extreme views and measures.’

      It’s frustrating and beggars belief that this site runs article after article that *we are doomed* and yet some areas of discussion concerning what ails ‘white’ people are avoided like the plague. “The limiting of public discourse to politically correct discourse and only politically correct discourse will make [white] society weaker in the long-run.” -Bardamu.

      • Rerevisionist
        Rerevisionist says:

        A relevant issue is the possibility that Hitler was just another one of a group of Jews, the whole war being manipulated to make Russians (not Jews) fight Germans (not Jews) and kill many tens of millions. I think myself this must be true (see e.g. ) but hardly anyone debates it. It’s probably the most important single question censored by Jewry.

        • Carolyn Yeager
          Carolyn Yeager says:

          What you suggest is not a possibility, not a relevant issue, and definitely not the most important single question censored by Jewry.

          I do think it’s quite possible YOU are one of a group of Jews who are here to push your conspiratorial views and websites, in which I have no interest whatsoever.

          • Rerevisionist
            Rerevisionist says:

            Not a possibility? Read hexzane’s points (there are about fifteen; different aspects of WW2). Not relevant?? For years now people like Dennis Wise have been encouraged to back Hitler – Hitler was groomed and placed by Jews. I’m afraid you just haven’t got the picture. But you’re in numerous company, including Kevin MacDonald.

        • Eric
          Eric says:

          Hitler was not “just another one of a group of Jews.” That tired smear against a great man has been debunked over and over again. But it persists nevertheless.

          The latest purveyor of the nonsense is Christopher Jon Bjerknes — who is, of course, a Jew.

          • Rerevisionist
            Rerevisionist says:

            OK – do me a favour and debunk hexzane on (say) 1 Freemasons and Germans, (2) Absurdly fast invasion of France, (3) D-Day and non-bombing of Britons, (4) Gibraltar left in Spanish hands although the Germans could have taken it, (5) Moscow left uninvaded despite Germans troops being near. I don’ imagine you’ll do this, of course.

          • Charles Frey
            Charles Frey says:

            On April 28, ’45, Hanna Reitsch, this incredibly accomplished test pilot and record-setter, landed her light Fieseler Storch west of the Brandenburg Gate to visit Hitler and fly him out of the encircled city.

            If memory serves, her suggestion was a flight to some Alpine hideout. Hitler declined and gave her a cyanide capsule instead, which she may have taken when 67.

            It would be very helpful if some of these fools would produce a flight plan for Reitsch, Hitler and Brown, to visit his uncle Rothschild in London.

            An idiotic, totally inexcusable ignorance of the man’s psyche.

    • Karlfried
      Karlfried says:

      Hello “m”
      (quote:) The idea that if only ‘white’ folks banded together they could or would likely preserve their indigenous historical cultural heritage is an odd notion.(end of quote)
      I agree with that sentence. Which conclusions will derive from this?
      The main conclusion is: the fight for life, for our own life, is an obligation that nature gives to all living beings on a daily basis.
      We can not avoid that enduring fight. That fight can never be won, but it can be lost. The best result is that we or our children and their children stay alive in the world game. And than they will have to fight, and so on.
      We must accept that there is a fight for life.
      The greatest danger is that our children or the other Germans do not see the danger of being destroyed by the existence of large numbers (in the order of several ten millions) of non-Germans, nonwhites within Germany.
      Other white countries are in the same situation.

      • Karlfried
        Karlfried says:

        Note: The former letter (above) it to “m”, this one is to
        Carolyn Yeager.

        Hello Caroly Yeager
        the inner circle is the nation, in my case das deutsche Volk
        (quote: Der kostbarste Besitz auf dieser Welt, aber – ist das eigene Volk. Und
        für dieses Volk – und um dieses Volk, wollen wir ringen und wollen wir
        kämpfen. Und Niemals erlahmen; und Niemals ermüden; und Niemals verzagen;
        und Niemals verzweifeln.
        End of quote)
        And we have friends in the other European or Europe-stemming nations. …
        Among thinking Germans we do not omit the thought how the world would look like in case we would have won the Second World War.

        • Carolyn Yeager
          Carolyn Yeager says:

          Karlfried, I know you are in Germany (a very dangerous place) and I am not. I respect that you are living the fight, and I am not. I know there are other Europeans allied with this fight; I know many of them personally. But I still have my views, from where I stand, right or wrong. Yesterday I wrote this on another forum to a German man living in Germany as you are, as part of mentioning Germar Rudolf’s latest book translated into English: “Garrison and Headquarters Orders of the Auschwitz Concentration Camp.”

          “I think the German people need to be the ones to go to battle, no matter the cost, and not leave it to other Europeans as so many Germans are more than happy to do. They seem to think non-Germans are more qualified, or more credible/believable than a German, even (or especially) Jews. Not so at all, because it’s not just an intellectual argument at stake but a blood libel against every German and his whole people, including not only his grandparents and great-grandparents but his children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren!! ”

          And please don’t anyone tell me that all Europeans are now similarly accused. They’re not. They’re just (not quite) similarly gagged.

        • Charles Frey
          Charles Frey says:


          Yes, but think of the myriad of benefits befalling you from the Jewish direction.

          Legislation enacted in the US benefitted Germany by resettling several hundred thousands of Russian Jews in Germany; primarily Berlin. Their ” pension ” might have sufficed for a bagel with lox at Ostrovsky’s – but the remainder was financed by the taxpayer.

          Simultaneously that swine Merkel exported her impecunious German seniors eastwards, for cheaper keep, because her budget was strained: in large part by working on the fourth of six gifted and subsidized German, Dolphin-class U-Boots to Israel, designed to accommodate 1000 mile range, 200 kiloton nuclear-tipped cruise-missiles. [ Undoubtedly to discourage Palestinian fishermen from depleting the Eastern Mediterranean’s herring supply and affording their population more calories per day, per person, than the minimum required by international law: calculated by the de facto Occupying Power with a sharp pencil and controlled by the precise number of trucks allowed in. School supplies and toys were entirely embargoed by this LIGHT UNTO THE NATIONS which saw its US official and private welfare payments mount ].

          Merkel, the populist [!], advertises a direct email line to her personally. I suggested, that she defray the fuel-cost of delivering these gifted subs to Israel, by stashing her ” Granny Export elders ” onto their decks on garden chairs and dropping them overboard when close to a dock in a cheaper, recipient Eastern European country, to additionally save port fees.

          She never replied regarding possible relevant Ministerial Bundestag debates: nor Budget Committee discussions: not even informal talks with MdB, DDR-very leftover Communist Galinsky.

          K, just as you wrote in German to Carolyn, why don’t you apprise your German circles, that a former Berliner, living happily in the Canadian ” bush ” still shares an interest in your fate.

          You might add the following, unintentionally exceedingly humorous story regarding these subs.

          Two agents of the intrepid, deadly efficient Mossad were dispatched by the Israeli Embassy in Berlin, to shadow the progress of one of these subs, from its wharf down the Kiel Canal. Near a small town, they decided to have a closer look right up to the Canal. They broke a lock and entered a forbidden area to drive on a forbidden road.

          Moses was busy with that other future annexationist bankruptcy lawyer and US Ambassador Friedmann and their attempt to part a humongous, photographed and published puddle without him misfired. Their small rented car got hopelessly mired. They returned to their point of illegal entry and asked a local elderly woman where they might contact a farmer with a tractor. Farmer cum tractor also got stuck.

          The sea-wise woman asked them what they were doing there. As land-rats they replied, that they were assessing the [ narrow ] canal for a scheduled regatta.

          Police and Fire trucks were ordered in, but only a major commercial hauler-truck finally extricated the rented spy car and hapless farmer. The intrepid Mossad credit cards were insufficient to pay the by now considerable fees to several parties.

          The local news covered the story and a daily published the hilarious, but very serious letter dispute with the Israeli Embassy, which, grudgingly, finally antied up the ca. 3,000 Euros to the Municipality and tow truck operator.

          Friends asked why I was walking about grinning to myself for two weeks.

          Recently the Bundestag decided to relax the immigration requirements for additional Russian Jewish immigrants, by exempting them from all assessments as to their chances for assimilation. It must have been Operation Barbarossa which caused them to reach the age of 60 by now, and to have acquired mental handicaps. The two classes so exempted by the Bundestag.

          My aunt in East Berlin worked all her life and paid into her pension plan. When she reached a widowed 65, these gangsters, finally, allowed her to leave, instead of shooting her while attempting to flee that ” First Peasants’ and Workers’ Paradise on German Soil “, transferring her pension payout to the West Germans.

          My very best wishes to all of you German taxpayers and their ever changing goal posts. Pease don’t let the above stories die. Research them in the press south of Kiel for well-sourced facts. And let us hear from you again soon. Your English is quite remarkable.

          • Karlfried
            Karlfried says:

            Hello Carolyn Yeager and Charles Frey,
            thank you for your replies. I give a short reply. Please know that I like you and the other writers and it is only for the sake of clearness that I speak frankly.
            1. (quote)
            … And please don’t anyone tell me that all Europeans are now similarly accused. …(quote)
            Answer: We Germans do not feel accused at all. We have a nice Volk and we like the other peoples (Völker) in the world. We have some days when the Bundestag gives some speeches about this and that, especially at 9. November, 27. Januar, Anne Frank and so on.
            But that speeches are allright, they can even produce some tears, that is all right. If they want to whine, let them whine, why not if they like to do so. The influence onto the normal German is almost zero. Maybe the US-American press exaggerates the situation in Germany.

            2. Russian and Ukrainian jews were enabled by German law to immigrate into Germany by the hundredthousands in the years following the year 1990. Within Germany some went to the mass media, some to other jobs and places within our country. I guess that this German Law expresses the power of US-American Jewry upon the US-Government and as a consequence, upon the German government. There is by far no other explanation why the Bundestag made such a law.

            3. At the same time the Bundesregierung gave several U-Boote to Israel, at least the first one for free, the other ones for a little price. The U-Boote for Israel are equipped with fire stations in which atomic weapons will fit. The U-Boote for Germany have a fire station for standard, non-atomic weapons. That story goes for decades now. Details see under “U-Boote, Dolphin-Klasse, Israel”.
            For those who can read German, there is no secret in these facts.

            4. Our main goal in life is to give or country, our culture, the way we behave and the way that our faces and bodies look to our own children and grand-children.
            That is the law of nature, and we like it.

            5. For those who like European music: A song from Slovenia, that is a small country south of Austria, and it belongs to Mitteleuropa. Kašubovci: Chaka Chaka (Cover)
            They sing in Slovenian, that is a slavic language.

          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            Hi Karlfried,
            I know you from previous comments here, and you know me the same way. I’m not impressed with your German worldview, and this is why nationalists in the U.S. for example, and elsewhere, put no store in Germans ever winning back anything of what they lost. You don’t even acknowledge you lost anything. Germans, according to you, are very comfortable in their present EU cocoon.
            It’s clear you are not participating in a democracy, but accepting what is decided for you.
            You say:
            “Our main goal in life is to give or country, our culture, the way we behave and the way that our faces and bodies look to our own children and grand-children.”
            Yet, the German birth rate is dangerously low so non-Germans will be doing this better than you. When they are able to elect their own political leaders, you will have no say in the matter, even less than now. I guess you’re hoping your children are stronger than you … or maybe it’s a suicide pact.
            I like you too, but only barely. I don’t like the music video, sorry; do not understand what it’s supposed to mean to you, or to me & Charles. It represents the German love affair with Africa?

  14. Junghans
    Junghans says:

    It has been said that RACE IS THE KEY TO HISTORY, and I would certainly concur with that salient observation. The de facto American Empire is obviously rotting from within, and its just a matter of ‘racial time’ before it really comes unglued. The current virus triggered economic malaise will likely accelerate it near term. To wit, a racial/political reality check is coming for heretofore complacent Whites, and it’s probably going to be economic dispossession that will cause it. When the comfort zone that most Whites live in evaporates, and is gate crashed by the dark hordes of Judah, we’ll see if the usurped system can contain their self destructive creation.

  15. George Kocan Kocan
    George Kocan Kocan says:

    The last thing that commies and their friends want is a society united by race, Christianity, language, culture, traditions and borders.

      • Eric
        Eric says:

        If Christianity is such a “Jewish cult,” why do the Jews hate it so much?, July18, 2012:

        by Tzvika Brot

        “MK Ben Ari rips up New Testament.

        Right-wing lawmaker tears up ‘abominable’ book sent to him by Christian organization, throws it in trash bin”

        • Rerevisionist
          Rerevisionist says:

          Eric asks: If Christianity is Jewish, why do Jews hate it so much?
          [1] Eric, don’t be shocked – Jews often tell lies! Really! I know, it’s hard to believe. If they pretend to be enemies, they can get away with allocating cities to Jews, and the country to Christians. And Popes can announce that Jews mustn’t be touched, and that interest is so shokcing that Jews must be given a monopoly. Think about it.
          [2] Ideas mutate, and Jews always look out for thing they can steal. Probably some Christians thought they really had independence and could ignore Jews. Just as some gullible Americans thought they were free and independent.

  16. Fiona MacDonall
    Fiona MacDonall says:

    Good article.

    However, I am puzzled by a general lack of knowledge and inability to simply explain the founding of the US.

    J. R. Sizoo tells us: “When Cornwallis was driven back to ultimate retreat and surrender at Yorktown, all of the colonels of the Colonial Army but one were Presbyterian elders. More than one-half of all the soldiers and officers of the American Army during the Revolution were Presbyterians.”

    The historian Bancroft says: “The Revolution of 1776, so far as it was affected by religion, was a Presbyterian measure. It was the natural outgrowth of the principles which the Presbyterianism of the Old World planted in her sons, the English Puritans, the Scotch Covenanters, the French Huguenots, the Dutch Calvinists, and the Presbyterians of Ulster.”

    A colonial supporter of King George III wrote home: “I fix all the blame for these extraordinary proceedings upon the Presbyterians. They have been the chief and principal instruments in all these flaming measures. They always do and ever will act against government from that restless and turbulent anti-monarchial spirit which has always distinguished them everywhere.”

    Prime Minister Horace Walpole said in Parliament, “Cousin America has run off with a Presbyterian parson” (John Witherspoon, president of Princeton, signer of Declaration of Independence).

    “John Endicott, the first governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony; John Winthrop, the second governor of that Colony; Thomas Hooker, the founder of Connecticut; John Davenport, the founder of the New Haven Colony; and Roger Williams, the founder of the Rhode Island Colony, were all Calvinists. William Penn was a disciple of the Huguenots. It is estimated that of the 3,000,000 Americans at the time of the American Revolution, 900,000 were of Scotch or Scotch-Irish origin, 600,000 were Puritan English, and 400,000 were German or Dutch Reformed. In addition to this the Episcopalians had a Calvinistic confession in their Thirty-nine Articles; and many French Huguenots also had come to this western world.” Loraine Boettner, theologian

    “This striking similarity between the principles set forth in the Form of Government of the Presbyterian Church and those set forth in the Constitution of the United States has caused much comment. ‘When the fathers of our Republic sat down to frame a system of representative and popular government,’ says Dr. E. W. Smith, ‘their task was not so difficult as some have imagined. They had a model to work by.”

    Calvin favored a republican form of government, not monarchy, in contrast to many of the Reformers. To function, a republic must have a well educated population. Calvin started schools in Geneva to educate everyone, unlike the Roman Catholic Church which only educated young males called to serve. Calvin has been called the “founding father of America.” Calvin wanted no church named for him, so we have a wide variety of denominations with Calvinist theology. In 1562 the Protestant Church of France, the Huguenots, formed a colony in Florida which was obliterated by the Spanish Roman Catholics.

    Calvin was not only a threat to the hegemony of the Roman Catholic Church; he was also a threat to the Monarchs. He left France ahead of a mobile Madam Guillotine.

    There is no state, institution, or society founded by Christian European people from need, through sacrifice, by nurture, with practice, which is not eventually overwhelmed by those eager to participate, eager to benefit, eager to… change to suit themselves. We sometimes invited them: come and see, learn how we built it, take it back home with you. But they stayed….

    Then it becomes something else; it helps the parasite and it hurts the host.

    Charles Murray noted the founding fathers all believed that virtue must form the foundation of the republic and all agreed on these four: marriage, religiosity, honesty, and industriousness.

    Permit me to name the greatest single besetting sin of the European People Group. It is our naiveté.

    • Rerevisionist
      Rerevisionist says:

      Very many Christian groups were established by Jews. Calvinists, Jesuits, Mormons I think, probably Puritans (“… live cheaply ..”), Quakers. Christianity itself. And even Islam. In my view, the most convincing writer on this is Miles Mathis. Probably Presbyterians are yet another such group.
      I’m not sure in naivete is the besetting sin; it may be venality, the secret acceptance of money and baubles even for making war on other whites.

    • ChilledBee
      ChilledBee says:

      Permit me to name the greatest single besetting sin of the European People Group. It is our naiveté.

      In some instances the “naiveté” can be explained Reflecting upon my own horrendous experience with a sociopath – it is very difficult to recognize and therefore protect yourself from sociopaths/psychopaths when you encounter them as they possess behaviors that are so alien to yours that you are at a complete loss as to how to deal with them.
      White Christians were/are so ripe for the picking when parasites came upon them. They too did not, and do not have the ability to recognize the danger in front of them. When you combine this with “turn the other cheek” in Christian doctrine, our fate is sealed.

      • Eric
        Eric says:

        Yes, the psychopath is good at lulling his victims into thinking he’s a good person. He has no qualms about committing acts that are evil. His ability to be a chameleon enables him to lower the guard of his victims. We think of psychopaths as individuals. But I think the Jews fit that profile quite well.

  17. TheParadoxicologist
    TheParadoxicologist says:

    Right now the average U.S. White is like cattle bred for slaughter – every basic survival need is met, entertainment is ubiquitous. As long as the life of the average White is comfy as fuck they will barely care what happens around them.. And Jewish-owned media won’t help. For America to survive it must fall. That’s the paradoxical reality.

    Just thinking.

  18. JRM
    JRM says:

    Very solid article. Good, straight thinking for those who still like to indulge in it.

    Since Spengler has been invoked, let’s step back a bit and ask ourselves if the well-documented American Twilight delineated in this article is something that can be halted at the eleventh hour. In addition, let’s challenge ourselves by looking beyond the multiculturalism and Judaic control aspects we know so well.

    All things whether individuals or groups, institutions or nations, are subject to decline. Entire species of animals have gone through birth, maturity and extinction. Let’s ask ourselves, if we could somehow magically remove all Jews and blacks and mutts of darker hues: could we prolong the life of this current Empire? (I look around me at our culture and a good part of our people and suspect we couldn’t, ‘tho since the Jewish cultural poison is so far advanced in its work, the point may not be worth making).

    Don’t get me wrong- I’d love to be able to see such a transformation in population as hypothetically directed along racial lines. Or even just a turning of the clock hands back a century or so.

    But if we think quite rigorously, it may be that the Jews and all non-Whites are a means to our decline, but that they are not the sole means by which such a decline may be earned. In other words, can anything last forever? Why do great nations decline, implode, become corrupt, or whither away with such inevitable regularity?

    We can postulate that genetics do play a role; we could theorize that all previous empires fell due to dysgenic population shifts. Can we prove that? I think we can say Rome is a good candidate, though historians have proposed multiple other reasons. The collapse of Empires also doesn’t necessarily mean an empty wasteland followed. China has seen the collapse of Empires but is obviously still a cultural and political force today.

    What if the American Empire had, say, a roughly pre-ordained lifespan of 2 or 3 hundred years, tops, *no matter how carefully it was shepherded*?

    • Eric
      Eric says:

      I think the more pertinent question is whether Aryans and the overall civilization they created can survive. When Greece fell to Rome, it was a case of one Aryan group defeating another Aryan group. Likewise when Rome fell to the Germanic tribes.

      Nations and empires might have a limited shelf life, as you suggest, but what about races and civilization in general?

      The white West is currently on a suicidal course, but the white East is not following that course. It used to be, “Go West, young man.” Now it might be “Go East — to Russia, Hungary, Poland, Czechia or Slovakia.”

      The other possibility I would promote is a potential white ethnostate or confederation of ethnostates that would arise in the aftermath of a civil war or economic collapse.

      • JRM
        JRM says:

        @Eric – very good points.

        To tell you the truth, I’m not all that invested in “America’s” survival – meaning the current political entity, this Empire, not the land mass. I’d love to see the country we could have here, freed from the political bonds and elites now controlling us.

        As good as the Founder’s attempt at establishing a Republic was, with hindsight we can easily see the seeds of decline sown right at the start. Probably the biggest problem with the Constitution is that the writers assumed everyone was talking about a country for White men, but they didn’t see the need to explicitly state that. Nor did they ban the immigration of certain groups. And later amendments have drastically hollowed out the original intentions of the document itself.

        Yes, the decline of Nations is interesting, as a political and philosophical problem, but far more critical is the survival of the Aryan people. We may see a healthy, viable society of White men living here again some day, but it won’t, and needn’t be, the USA.

  19. Gerry
    Gerry says:

    The end of the American Empire? Hmmmm, I’d say not if the Freemasons have anything to say about it. No group of people are so united in thought and deed as them. As an example watch this video interview and consider what the Israeli says about the all seeing eye and the veins etc of a diagram from the World Economic Forum and Covid 19?

    Mind blowing really! But hey if the American Empire ends it will be because these people surely overestimated themselves.

    In interview of Harry Vox by Israeli podcaster, start about 54:45 and watch 4-5 minutes. Podcaster goes to World Economic Forum website & shows AMAZING layers of actions under “COVID action platform”—had to be planned long in advance.

  20. H%
    H% says:

    USURY —abolished– our republic in 1933.

    Rockefeller USURY is wrapping up its seven decades on the move RED China treason project.

    Rockefeller MED’s – – Gates EUGENICS — – planned– – put away is unfolding.

    KEEP running that clock .

    MAO smiles.

    • Rerevisionist
      Rerevisionist says:

      Many people still think the main issue with Jews was ‘usury’. This propagandist view is still promoted by Roman Catholics. In fact, this is a near-irrelevance, hiding the real issues—large-scale taxes, rents, tithes, interference with money, swindles, parasitic shareholdings, wars. The churches concealed these facts in a symbiotic relationship with Jews.

      • Trenchant
        Trenchant says:

        “Interference with money” better expressed as its outright creation from nothing to be loaned out at interest.

        High interest rates aren’t good or bad, they may be entirely justified by the borrower’s poor credit profile or adverse economic outlook. Government-sanctioned monopoly quite something different.

Comments are closed.