“Otherizing” the intruders among us: strangers can be dangerous

Let’s begin by saying that “The Other is not my brother,” in spite of the basic tenets of our Christian society which is founded on the concept:  “Love thy neighbor as thyself.”  When we examine the evolution of social interactions, we find that the reason we do not love our neighbor (not necessarily the one who lives next to us but humans at large) is because we tend intuitively to hold unfamiliar individuals at arms’ length both emotionally and physically.  To be blunt, strangers are initially considered “hostile” or untrustworthy unless proven otherwise.

This exclusionary attitude (or “otherization” as we say) is not an anti-social or malevolent choice on our part.  It is firmly embedded in our cultural ethos and our DNA, given that strangers’ reputations, such as for honesty, would likely be less well known and hence interacting with them would be risky. It goes back many, many millennia to a time when we wandered in tribes or extended families across the Eurasian plains.

In the beginning, we were “hunter-gatherers” whose days were devoted to acquiring food off the land.  To survive, homo sapiens or Cro-Magnons needed a cooperative and close-knit bond of familial unity. The hunt for prey and food was the focal point of each day’s activities. Women, if social paleontology is correct, did not stray far from home—whether a cave, a hut or some other form of habitat. They were presumably “keepers of the hearth.”  They bore and raised children, searched for edible vegetation, and cared for the elderly or infirm.  The familial unit within the tribe was a protective shield against a mysterious and dangerous world.  When another humanoid or family group appeared unexpectedly, the entire unit’s stability and safety were threatened.

The “stranger-danger” motif was and continues to be wired into the individual psyche: without this defense mechanism, each member of the tribe was put in jeopardy.  For the most part, the intruder was either expelled or killed.  Throughout the animal kingdom, the rejection of the “other,” e.g., among chimpanzees—our closest relatives, is a basic survival instinct.  Our bodies are programmed to “fight or flee.”

In the earliest days of humankind, the species was protected by the exclusion of unknown others.  From a modern-day perspective, this hostility toward the “outsider” is a leitmotif that is woven into the fabric of literature and especially the western movie.  A number of films portray this theme, notably Alan Ladd’s Shane and Clint Eastwood’s rebellious Pale Rider, who both challenge the forces of evil in a remote cattle ranch or mining encampment where only the steely-eyed gunfighter can impose law and order.  This dichotomy is an integral part of the conquest of the Far West:  the transitory “hero” or vigilante who symbolizes society’s need for justice and public safety in opposition to the antagonist who seeks to rule by brutal domination for “nefarious” reasons.  Law-abiding citizens were at the mercy of amoral predators who roamed unchecked throughout the region. Fear and self-defense were triggered by challenges to familial and community stability. Under these conditions settlers were forced to choose either certain subjugation to a lawless invader or an orderly life under the protection of a hired gun and vigilantism.

Today, if we accept contemporary propaganda, the stranger or the interloper is a person who should be welcomed into the household or family unit.  In America, the innate goodness of all people is a foundational principle of “our way of life.”  And as a result, we highlight bits and pieces of our cultural history if it fits this narrative. In a pioneer society, a helping hand is extended to strangers in need. The Biblical parable of the Good Samaritan resonates even today.  We sometimes see examples of strangers performing potentially sacrificial acts to help others.  For example, the donation of kidneys, portions of livers, or bone marrow transplants to unknown victims of disease isn’t all that surprising.  Such gestures, of course, are not without considerable risk. The loss of a kidney can have lethal consequences for donors in case of renal failure.

Of course, altruism does exist, so we find ourselves asking: what drives this (actually quite rare) spontaneous altruism? Some putative acts of altruism actually may reflect ordinary self-interest. First responders are paid to have a professional obligation to put their lives at risk for the benefit of others who face danger. They are courageous but not altruistic. In a similar manner, people will give to needy individuals on “Go Fund Me” pages without the slightest proof of authenticity.  Self-sacrifice for the public good competes with the preservation of those closest to us regardless of outside commitments.

But there are examples of real altruism, and we can ask, whether they are acts of pure generosity—a social obligation—or do they respond to a need in the individual for self-fulfillment and public admiration?  Are Western elites being altruistic when they promote mass immigration of ethnically heterogeneous peoples? It is notable that such acts of compassion toward complete strangers tend not to be practiced by those in positions of authority or extreme wealth outside the family unit. Here’s an example of elite attitudes toward immigration posing as altruism by David Goodhart, a liberal journalist based in the UK, on migration to the UK:

There has been a huge gap between our ruling elite’s views and those of ordinary people on the street. This was brought home to me when dining at an Oxford college and the eminent person next to me, a very senior civil servant, said: ‘When I was at the Treasury, I argued for the most open door possible to immigration [because] I saw it as my job to maximise global welfare not national welfare.’ I was even more surprised when the notion was endorsed by another guest, one of the most powerful television executives in the country. He, too, felt global welfare was paramount and that he had a greater obligation to someone in Burundi than to someone in Birmingham. … [The political class] failed to control the inflow more overtly in the interests of existing citizens.

One can only marvel at the completely unhinged—pathological—altruism on display here, given that the speakers are themselves native White British. Countries whose policies ignore the good of their own people are surely headed for disaster. Such altruism is nothing but a recipe for evolutionary extinction.

It is well-known that massive non-White immigration has negative effects most of all on the traditional, White working class of Western societies, while wealthier Whites can escape the problems brought about by immigration by moving to better neighborhoods.  They also tend to have jobs that have not been impacted by immigration, although visas for workers in technical areas are increasingly common. However, contemporary liberal-minded elites throughout the West are indifferent or even dismissive of the negative effects of immigration on the White working class in terms of lowered wages,[1] lessened community cohesion and involvement,[2] and deteriorating public schools. Like Charles Dickens’ Mrs. Jellyby’s (i.e., the character from Bleak House), this included neglecting her own children—also characteristic of contemporary liberals who typically fail to think seriously about the effects of mass non-White migration on the long-term prospects of their own children as a minority in a majority non-White society.

Is it possible to absorb large numbers of ethnically heterogeneous migrants and maintain a stable and productive society?  It’s at least doubtful. The outside world demands a different set of values from the dynamics of the home place.  At first encounter all mammals are motivated by instinct to defend their “turf” against intruders.  Suspicion of the “other” runs deep in our genetic code. The exclusion of strangers is a primordial means of survival.

In today’s highly politicized world, the criticism of the other’s motives and way of life is labeled a sign of bigotry, racism, or xenophobia, among other epithets. We are constantly reminded of this humanistic dimension of our social contract.  This openness is often claimed to be more than an attitude; it is a duty.  However, very few restrictions are placed on the outsider by the welcoming community—even obeying laws is waived given how illegal immigrants are simply waved in these days by a Biden administration intent on ending White America as quickly as possible.  The supposed demands of being kind to the stranger (actually, a way of getting votes for Democrats—unrestricted immigration has become a demographic weapon in the hands of the progressives) and the availability of cheap labor supersede the application of the law.

In the woke philosophy of today, illegal migrants are being classified as “protected” groups.  By virtue of their physical presence in America, they are endowed with a privileged status according to the current administration.  Only casually vetted for disease and criminal activity—if at all, they are packed into buses and airplanes and sent to undisclosed sites in our country without notifying local authorities.  Hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens are swarming across our borders and not being deported. Border guards wave them onto American soil and offer assistance to everyone in need before processing.

Homogeneity initially builds trust among strangers.  It is much easier to incorporate an unknown person into a neighborhood when people have similar backgrounds.  The “stranger-danger” reflex is activated when a community loses control over its values and relationships.  Diverse families living in urban high-rise projects do not willingly socialize on a large scale.  They are either suspicious of each other or realize they have very little in common.  They are not in sync or, as we say, not on the same page in many aspects of daily life.

For many centuries the Jewish people have lived in ghettoes or closed ethnic communities.  Hebrew and Yiddish are not languages that non-Jews typically learn.  By adhering to a life apart, living in an insular community with overt religious symbols, the Jewish people became the other in the eyes of homogeneous societies. And because homogeneous Christian societies have sometimes risen up against them, Jews have been vigorous champions of multiculturalism. As Otis Graham noted (2004, 80), the Jewish lobby on immigration “was aimed not just at open doors for Jews, but also for a diversification of the immigration stream sufficient to eliminate the majority status of western Europeans so that a fascist regime in America would be more unlikely.”

Even though contemporary rates of intermarriage are high, the Jewish community continues to take steps to ensure its homogeneity. There are dating sites for Jewish couples.  Jewish social gatherings for singles are organized by synagogues, and Jewish teenagers are given trips to Israel to solidify Jewish identity and promote marriage to other Jews.

To outsiders, Judaism has a cultish appearance: Orthodox Jews typically wear distinguishing clothing, and there are rites of passage (bar and bat mitzvahs) and multiple customs that set them apart from the Christian population.  Religious holidays play a significant role in the life of the average Jew.  In the Christian world, only Christmas and Easter have any true importance.  The rest are listed on the calendar but rarely observed. Devout Jews (e.g., Hassidic) lead a parallel life of religious observance.  In a sense, one is first and foremost a Jew and only secondarily an inhabitant of a specific country—even in Israel.

We cannot unlearn the defensive strategies of our cultural and genetic heritage.  At the very heart of our social dynamic is the need for survival and perpetuation of our genes, and that in turn is tied to the fate of those with whom we share the most genetic similarity—our race. But the reality is that wealthy and politically stable Western countries are being assaulted by hordes of desperately poor migrants as depicted in the French dystopian novel The Camp of the Saints by Jean Raspail (1973).  As world economies worsen, vast numbers of Third World discontents will continue to seek refuge and a new life in wealthier countries—essentially a death sentence for the peoples who created the West.

As the adage tells us: “Birds of a feather flock together.”  You are compelled by nature (or a powerful survival instinct) to associate with people who look like you and with whom you have a lot in common. As we have learned over the years, diversity is not a “strength” but a source of stress and division throughout the world.  Highly diversified neighborhoods are more insular and less civic-minded than those with more homogeneous residents.  If we are left alone and not counseled or threatened with punishment, we tend to select associates who are similar in many respects.  Comfort level or quality of life is a determining criterion in our choice of friends and acquaintances.  Social clubs, such as sororities and fraternities, are based on a selective process of similarity and congeniality.  We are, in every respect, what nature made us to be: selective and protective.

In conclusion, we inherited profound tendencies that link us to the survival instincts of our earliest years.  They served us well millennia ago and will continue to give us alternatives to the artificiality of enforced social relationships.  The stability and longevity of our society depend on recognizing the legitimacy of these inbred tendencies that govern our ethnic behavior. Forcing us to live otherwise will bring about nothing but social disorder and internal conflict.

[1] George J. Borjas, “The Analytics of the Wage Effect of Immigration,” Working Paper 14796 (March, 2009), National Bureau of Economic Research.


[2] Robert D. Putnam, “E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-first Century,” Scandinavian Political Studies 3 (2007): 137–174; Salter, “The Biosocial Study of Ethnicity”; see also Frank K. Salter, “Germany’s Jeopardy,” You Tube (January 5, 2016).

64 replies
  1. Robert Henderson
    Robert Henderson says:

    The most important thing for those who do not accept the politically correct “diversity is good” line is to identify what mass immigration amounts to. The answer is simply the immigrants are invaders and the elites (and their followers) which permit the invasion are guilty of the most fundamental treason. This is so because once immigrants are in a country in numbers sufficient to effectively colonise areas of the invaded country they can only be removed from the country by violence. It is the most fundamental treason because unlike formal invasion and conquers where there is both some real chance of expelling the invader at some point and most importantly the expelling country will not be treated as a pariah for expelling the invader as would the case where those to be expelled were immigrants (and their descendants) who reside in a country because the elites of the country have allowed the immigration to occur.

    In the UK the first step towards shackling the elite is to pass a treason law with teeth, something the UK has arguably lacked for more than a century. W also need a law to in effect ban political correctness because that totalitarian creed makes honest discussion about race and immigration a perilous business with penalties ranging from prison to loss of jobs to social ostracisation.

    In short we need to reverse the situation we live in now .

      • Robert Henderson
        Robert Henderson says:

        The way forward lies in removing all the privileges and aides to invaders, this to include

        End all legal immigration including relatives join those already here.

        Repudiate the UN Convention on Refugees.

        Allow immigrants to be returned to their home countries regardless of how their home countries are likely to treat the immigrants.

        Remove all human rights protection from immigrants

        Deport any immigrant convicted of criminal behaviour resulting in a prison sentence over 3 month. .
        Withdraw all the services of the welfare state from immigrants.

        Adults Immigrants who arrive to be put to be put in prison with hard labour.

        Make illegal all organisations and individuals which attempt to assist immigrants.

        Remove all laws which criminalise free speech.

        That will do for a start. All I have suggested is within our power to execute.

          • Karlfried
            Karlfried says:

            There is a lot of approaches, and Robert Henderson mentioned some.
            One powerful tool is to convince someone that the normal thing, as nature has taught us in thousands of years, is also the right thing and the only thing for survival. If someone things 5 minutes about the truth, he will find out that multiculti is deadly for a white folk.

            Another point: In Germany, many people are terrifiet by the thought that they are seen “not politically correct” or that they are seen standing together with someone who might be seen as “not politically correct”. Not death nor poorness or violence is their greatest fear, but to be seen as “not politically correct” is their main fear. I guess that 80% of my fellow Germans are of this structure-of-the-character.

            How can we suck-honey-from-this situation? We adress this cowardness and we adress it clearly but indirectly.
            In a conversation, I say: “The liberals (=Gutmenschen) want a million poor non-European people to come in, and than the next million and so on. That is crazy, and I think that this is the worst possible crime against us that anyone could do. Under the camouflage “to-do-the-good-thing” they are killing us.”
            There is only 5 seconds time to say the sentence, than the others will turn their face away and speak about other things. They know that the sentence is true but they have fear within the controlled society.
            But later in a face to face encounter they give me right. We will say to the liberals that we do not buy their multiculti-crap and that we will have no compromise with them. In the hard times to come the liberals will have to stand on their one feet without any help. And that will make them fear and they will swing to our side as soon as they see that we are the strong ones and the coming winners.

        • Oscar Wilson
          Oscar Wilson says:

          In England, possible, if a majority of elected MPs carried these out. The present Con-Lab-Lib lot won’t do it. The “far right” get virtually no votes whenever an “election” is “called”, and no funds or media support. As election pledges many of these proposals are illegal under the specially devised legislation. At present, we can only nibble around the edges with people like Farage, Furedi and Fox.

        • William Gruff
          William Gruff says:

          You’re right Robert, however, it is one thing to draw attention to what is needed and quite another to get to the point at which we can ensure we have it. How, in a country in which the overwhelming majority of the population is terrified of being labelled a ‘racist’ and almost as many unquestioningly believe the all too obviously self-evident lies being pushed by the government to justify the destruction of ancient rights and liberties and the injection into everyone of toxic substances that are in no sense any sort of ‘vaccine’, are we to get to that point.

          Even if we could get to that position, how are we to defend ourselves from foreign aggression intended to halt and reverse our progress, given that our armed forces are now so weak that everyone in the know acknowledges that we cannot defend our borders?

          The last opportunity we in the ‘U’K had to change anything was in 2010 and the great British public chose, ‘in its infinite wisdom’, to continue down the path to annihilation.

          • Robert Henderson
            Robert Henderson says:

            William: the point is my suggestions are all entirely practical if the political will is there.

            The present political elites in the first World will of course say it is impossible but the bald fact is that it is possible and the elites can be challenged on why it is impossible and all they will be able to do is waffle about human rights and huff and puff that such measures are beyond the Pale.

    • Leon Haller
      Leon Haller says:

      For about 35 years, I have been referring to racially alien immigration as “the characteristic form of imperialism in the modern world” – a refrain I especially doubled down upon once the Soviet Empire imploded. Immigration of racially different peoples is simple government-sanctioned invasion. Put another way, it is demographic warfare, as opposed to the more normal military kind. Once we grasp this fact, a revolutionary new branch of the Christian ethics of war opens up.

      The situation must indeed be first halted, and later reversed (at least for Europe). WRT the US, both legal and illegal nonwhite immigration must be halted; the border must be secured; all resident aliens must be deported. But after that, whites who wish to live in peace, liberty and security must secede from both nonwhites *and* white progressives.

      • Poupon Marx
        Poupon Marx says:

        “Must” and “Will”are quite separate. A hospital patient in the Intersive Care Unit connot walk down to the ATM.

      • Lucius Vanini
        Lucius Vanini says:

        LEON HALLER–
        “Christian ethics of war”–lol–what’s that: resist not evil, turn the other cheek, pray for those who despitefully use you, and return good for evil, all spiced with contempt for the things of this corrupted world (racial heritage, ancestral lands included)?

        • Leon Haller
          Leon Haller says:

          You perfectly illustrate my point, as, alas, most of the modern world does, too. Neither you nor most contemporary ecclesial figures understands real Christianity. What you have in mind is merely a fictive image – one which well serves the interests of our enemies. Aquinas understood the distinction between neighbor and alien, friend and enemy, travelers and sojourners vs. invaders. He never stated that such distinctions were either illusory, meaningless, or evil.

          The old understandings have been deliberately discarded and forgotten. So the “answer” of modern fools like most commenters here at TOO is to toss out the “baby” of eternal truth with the “bathwater” of liberal ideological infection. This is both unnecessary, and, I argue, deeply dangerous. I believe in the core truths of Christianity, so for me the challenge is to reveal the moral-theological harmony between Christianity and white racial preservation (ie, to demonstrate why white racial self-abnegation – the nonsense you ascribe to the Faith {probably because you are anti-Christian based on either demonic misotheism, alien racial or religious Christophobia, or resentful atheism} -.is morally unnecessary, and perhaps outright wicked).

          But even if I were not Christian, even if I were a hardcore materialist atheist (which is likely what I would be were I not Christian [Catholic]), I would still support white preservationists seeking to “take back the Church”. Race and religion are the foundations of civilization. The white race has been gloriously Christian for, variously, 1000-1500 years. The Faith is an integral part of who we are. Its elaborate philosophical and theological structures give transcendent meaning (or at least the illusion of such) to people’s lives. That sense of transcendence is what impels men to make tremendous sacrifices, whether in martial glory, or the daily drudgery often associated with professional success as well as nurturing large families. We need such men and such sacrifices – and will need far more of such in our coming American (and West European) Time of Troubles. It is no accident that the age of white civilizational enervation and racial self-abnegation coincides with a time of rampant (and I think ultimately unsustainable) secularity. If there is no transcendence, no immortality subject to divine judgment, why should anyone care about the well being of future generations of whites, let alone the preservation of distant white civilization? We’ll all be dead, dude…

          No, the central task or our age is to take the Church back from the liberals masquerading as Christians (as well as the sincere but deeply ethically misguided Christians) who have seized it (just as foolish and apathetic conservatives and “white normals” have allowed every other white institution to be stolen from them by their racial and self-hating white enemies), and then reform it so as to make it once again a moral bulwark of white civilization (or at least prevent it from any longer falsely presenting obstacles to white preservation that are rooted in bad theology).

          • Lucius Vanini
            Lucius Vanini says:

            LEON HALLER–
            Yes, thanks to hypocrisy European Civilization became as great as it did (though not without that rebirth of the perspectives of Classical Hellas and Roma, known as the Renaissance). Your Crusader and Conquistador christianity–lol a square circle–has no root in the characteristic utterances of that mythical founder of your creed, which are to be found above all in the Sermon on the Mount.

            I’m thankful that European Civilization has largely been only nominally christian in morality (till relatively recently, when it imbibed christian altruism into its secular world-view, disastrously for us)–because this praising the Prince of Peace on Sunday and living by the sword the rest of the week got us, among other things, a European Global Hegemony anchored on several European multicontinental empires. Thank Pantheos that our ancestors served Mammon instead of your Hebrew god.

            Are you the same Angelicus who below posted “….one of the reasons, I would say the main one, of the idiotic Whites’ pathological altruism is that vile Jewish heresy known as Christianity”? Also, “The great Revilo Oliver defined Christianity as ‘spiritual syphilis,’ the best definition ever!”?

            If not, your saying to Haller “Excellent words my friend” would seem symptomatic of severe schizophrenia….

            HALLER: Do you regard black catholics as your brothers in Christ, spiritually preferable to European despisers of the Abrahamic superstitions, like moi?

        • Angelicus
          Angelicus says:

          Hello Lucius, I am replying here because the website, for some reason, would not allow me to reply to your last comment. No, I am not suffering from schizophrenia (LOL) Strangely enough my comment “Excellent words my friend” was addressed to you but for some ridiculous reason, the software placed my comment as if it was in support of Leon Haller. It is not the first time that something like this happens. Regards!

          • Lucius Vanini
            Lucius Vanini says:

            Meno male–as we say in Italy…. meaning “Okay, that’s better!” (Literally “Less evil.”)

            I read your three statements several times, thinking I’d perhaps not read them correctly.

            As regards the exchange with Haller, that worthy seems to suggest that critics of christian altruism and pacifism are pulling their perceptions out of thin air; but most of my reply to his talk of “Christian ethics of war” consists of paraphrases of actual NT precepts….

            Regarding the “contempt for things of this corrupted world,” let him deny that the christian view of “this” (as if we know of any other) world is that of a failed realm, one that went awry, one corrupted by Adam’s sin lol and the machinations of a mighty fallen angel–an order so tainted that it needs to be swept away by a Redeemer, and soon shall be….

            How are things like ethnic/genetic heritage and ancestral lands, and other such transient vanities, to be treasured amid so life- and reality-hating a world-view? Moreover the faithful believe that the boom shall be lowered on this world SOON–no doubt partly because of assertions like Matthew 16:28–“….some who are standing here shall not taste death until they’ve seen the Son of Man coming into His kingdom,” from which it’s clear that as far back as the age in which that Jesus figure is supposed to have lived it was believed that the end of this bad world was imminent…. It’s already way past due!

            Y’know, I wouldn’t be surprised if guys like Haller think that JESUS is thus going to pull our chestnuts out of the fire–in which case why do anything? In any case, though christian Eric would say that it’s counterproductive to condemn christianity when there are many christians in the WN movement, I think more and more that most of them are more a liability than anything else as they defend this ideological opiate brought to Europe by Rabbi Saul of Tarsus. I think Haller’s main intention here is not to further our chances of actually preserving our heritage through informed and determined action, but to vindicate and recommend christian belief….

            At any rate, if we can, as he seems to suggest, be warriors for our kind AGAINST such clear teachings as “resist not evil” and “return good for evil,” then why need we identify with the creed? Why must we be monsters of falsity? Why be hypocrites? Our ancestors who created a Global European Hegemony, giving lip-service to a god of love but actually following Mars and Mammon, were hypocrites and it’s good that they were, because being a real christian is much worse; BUT it would have been better if they’d been WHOLE–self-consistent–like their predecessors the Romans and Macedonians/Greeks. And they would not have kept alive the doctrinal altruism that their descendants, softened by inherited wealth and privilege, have grown weak enough to put into practice, whether in secular or sectarian dress.

            I’m disappointed that Haller hasn’t responded again, because now that I see he’s a catholic I want to say a few things about that gargantuan, loathsome criminal syndicate called the RCC. My country has a dubious talent for organized criminality, what with the Mafia, Camorra and ‘Ndrangheta; but its worst as well as incomparably greatest mob has been that vile global octopus which, in the name of humility and voluntary poverty, has exercised tyrannical power and amassed incalculable riches, terrorizing children and the dying with notions of eternal torment, burning thousands of “witches” and freethinkers, including my townsman Giordano Bruno and my namesake Lucilio Vanini, etc., etc.

          • Angelicus
            Angelicus says:

            Salve Lucius!: I am Italian too, in a manner of speaking, since both my parents were the children of Italian immigrants who arrived in Argentina just before WW1. My father’s family hails from Calabria and my mother’s from Sicily. I can read Italian quite well but I lost the speech for lack of practice. You must be familiar with the group called “Centro di Studi La Runa” created by Adriano Romualdi in the 1970s.

            If I remember correctly you once mentioned you have a blog. I would appreciate it very much if you can give me its address.


            PS: I hope you will get this reply since AGAIN I could not find a direct link to reply to you!

          • Lucius Vanini
            Lucius Vanini says:

            Salve, amico…. Si, Argentina e’ pieno degli Italiani. Had an uncle from Buenos Aires, though he was originally a Veneziano, from that City of the Sea where I once resided, the one city I love.

            Did you see my comment under the recent TOO article about that Talmudic bigot Jennifer Rubin, wherein I talk about Argentina?

            The link to my site is https://theeuropeanfamily.com Lots of stuff there critical of Judaism for the goyim.

            The newest, published two days ago, “25 Unpardonable Thought-Crimes,” talks about our countryman Columbus ( https://theeuropeanfamily.com/f/25-unpardonable-thought-crimes ), though I must say that I consider myself European first and Italian second.


          • Angelicus
            Angelicus says:

            Salve Lucius! Again, the website did not give me the option to reply directly to your comment as there was no “Reply” at the end of it. Yes, nearly 75% of the Argentinians are White and by that, I mean of European descent. Out of that, nearly 50% are of Italian descent. The Italian immigration to Argentina between 1880 and 1920 was huge and the contribution of the Italians to make this country rich and prosperous was enormous. For example, the great Argentinian wine industry was created by Italian immigrants from the Piamonte. Most of the finest Argentinian architects and engineers of the early XX century were Italians or sons of Italian immigrants.

            Tante grazie per l’indirizzo del tuo blog. Anch’io me sento prima di tutto europeo, cioe bianco.

  2. Margaret Bartley
    Margaret Bartley says:

    I don’t look at David Goodheart’s anecdote as an example of pathological altruistm, I see it as another example (as if we needed any more!) of the hostility of the Anglo-Saxon ruling elite towards their underlings. I suspect it might go back centuries, from when the invaders conquored the locals.That disdain and hostility has never really gone away.
    I think partly it’s a matter of spiritual protection – if they don’t think of us as fully human, it makes it easier to subject us to their devious plans. I’ve seen many examples over my lifetime of the contempt and disdain the ruling elite has toward the lower classes, and the hostility they have toward confortable, working-class people. The hostility is sometimes breath-taking.

    • Robert Henderson
      Robert Henderson says:

      In England the toleration of immigration goes back centuries. For example circa 1750 the UK Parliament passed an Act giving citizenship to Jews. This resulted in rioting in London serious enough for the Act to be repealed .

      The other problem is Acts being passed but never properly enforced, . For example, The Aliens Act 1905 was passed in the UK but never properly y enforced.

    • TJ
      TJ says:

      There is but one ruling elite- the jews who issue and control the fake money.

      “Give me the power to control a nation’s currency and I care not who makes the laws.”

      Mayer Amschel Rothschild

  3. Ned J. Casper
    Ned J. Casper says:

    The Biblical exhortation (Leviticus 19.18) does not mean that people should like those living next door. In the “OT” it is a statement of ethnic solidarity. In the “NT” (Luke 10.37) it is not intended as an instruction for Jews to love Samaritans, or invite in settlers from Samaria, Persia, Egypt or Rome, but a reproach directed at snooty “religious” Jews who fail to help another Jew victimised by muggers but who was helped temporarily by a Samaritan visitor; ironically a modern comparison might be with race-relations SJWs or woke cultists who do not wish to get involved or their hands dirty in a real street crime. Nevertheless, “loving enemies” and “resisting not evil” present problems, and predictably have degenerated among many churches today into ethnic self-abnegation in the face of foreign faiths and secular hedonism. Feeding the hungry, curing the sick and raising the dead were no problem for a miracle-working deity, but that is not the case in the actual world today.

    • TJ
      TJ says:

      Self-abnegation implies giving up one’s favorite things, such as. . .self-abnegation. Some folks are such blockheads that they cannot see the circularity. As A. Koestler wrote: “A masochist enjoys a cold shower so punishes himself with a hot shower.”

      I wonder if many philosophies/religion are salted ]like salting a mine[ with absurdities and contradictions, to see if adherents/observers are playing with a full deck. Many are like a koan of Zen, such as “What is the sound of one hand clapping?” The smart walk away, the dumb spend years analyzing the lunacy, marvelling at the profoundness of the guru.

      “You want to defeat us, or replace us for world leadership? You damn well better be smarter and more competent than we are- otherwise you may be locked down.”

      Any philosophy/religion that allows contradictions or absurdities is false from the start.

  4. Joe
    Joe says:

    The Stranger

    The Stranger within my gate,
    He may be true or kind,
    But he does not talk my talk–
    I cannot feel his mind.
    I see the face and the eyes and the mouth,
    But not the soul behind.
    The men of my own stock,
    They may do ill or well,
    But they tell the lies I am wanted to,
    They are used to the lies I tell;
    And we do not need interpreters
    When we go to buy or sell.
    The Stranger within my gates,
    He may be evil or good,
    But I cannot tell what powers control–
    What reasons sway his mood;
    Nor when the Gods of his far-off land
    Shall repossess his blood.
    The men of my own stock,
    Bitter bad they may be,
    But, at least, they hear the things I hear,
    And see the things I see;
    And whatever I think of them and their likes
    They think of the likes of me.
    This was my father’s belief
    And this is also mine:
    Let the corn be all one sheaf–
    And the grapes be all one vine,
    Ere our children’s teeth are set on edge
    By bitter bread and wine.

    – Rudyard Kipling

    • Pierre de Craon
      Pierre de Craon says:

      But they tell the lies I am wanted to

      Virtually every online source gets this line wrong, and its utter illiteracy seems to have gone unnoticed. The line actually reads as follows:

      But they tell the lies I am wonted to

      As “wonted to” means “accustomed to,” the line now makes sense, especially with respect to the line that follows it.

      It’s a remarkable poem, and in common with much of Kipling’s best poetry, it conceals its art behind the singsong of what in its own day were popular verse forms.

        • Pierre de Craon
          Pierre de Craon says:

          Thanks for the link to a poem I had never before seen by an author whose name I barely recall ever seeing.

          In Kipling’s “The Light That Failed” (1890), his character Dick Heldar says, “Four-fifths of everybody’s work must be bad, but the remnant is worth the trouble for its own sake.” This 80-percent-expendability rule may not hold for Spenser, Herbert, Keats, and two or three other English scribblers of verses, but I doubt whether Kipling, whatever his reaction to Stephen’s undeniably just mockery, had any illusions about its applicability to himself.

      • Leon Haller
        Leon Haller says:

        Good find, and excellent final observation. Kipling proved that intelligent poetry could also be enjoyable. Most modern “free verse” is less “high-concept” than merely “low talent”.

        On another note: there is a lot of ignorant anti-Christian sentiment on this thread. You might appreciate my comment above (few others here will).

        • Leon Haller
          Leon Haller says:

          (Mod. Note: Leon, this moderator (and probably others as well) has nothing to do with how the software organizes content.)


          What is WRONG with this site??!! My comment starting “Good find …” was clearly “in reply to” P. de Craon, NOT “Al Ross”. So why does it appear linked to the latter??! How hard is it to correct this bug?? Seriously!?

          • Pierre de Craon
            Pierre de Craon says:

            Look again, Leon. Your comment is positioned as a reply to the first of my two, not to Al’s interesting gloss. Most readers, I think, saw that your comment was referring to both of mine.

    • JM
      JM says:

      This is a brief companion piece…

      Dame Mary Gilmore (Australian leftist writer & poet)
      I have grown past hate and bitterness,
      I see the world as one;
      But though I can no longer hate,
      My son is still my son.
      All men at God’s round table sit,
      and all men must be fed;
      But this loaf in my hand,
      This loaf is my son’s bread.

    • JM
      JM says:

      And this is an earlier Australian poem empathetic to the fate of the Australian native people but the sympathies expressed within it are in the process of unfolding throughout the Western world, albeit with modifications.

      THE LAST OF HIS TRIBE by Henry Kendall

      He crouches, and buries his face on his knees,
      And hides in the dark of his hair;
      For he cannot look up to the storm-smitten trees,
      Or think of the loneliness there —
      Of the loss and the loneliness there.

      The wallaroos grope through the tufts of the grass,
      And turn to their coverts for fear;
      But he sits in the ashes and lets them pass
      Where the boomerangs sleep with the spear —
      With the nullah, the sling and the spear.

      Uloola, behold him! The thunder that breaks
      On the tops of the rocks with the rain,
      And the wind which drives up with the salt of the lakes,
      Have made him a hunter again —
      A hunter and fisher again.

      For his eyes have been full with a smouldering thought;
      But he dreams of the hunts of yore,
      And of foes that he sought, and of fights that he fought
      With those who will battle no more —
      Who will go to the battle no more.

      It is well that the water which tumbles and fills,
      Goes moaning and moaning along;
      For an echo rolls out from the sides of the hills,
      And he starts at a wonderful song —
      At the sound of a wonderful song.

      And he sees, through the rents of the scattering fogs,
      The corroboree warlike and grim,
      And the lubra who sat by the fire on the logs,
      To watch, like a mourner, for him —
      Like a mother and mourner for him.

      Will he go in his sleep from these desolate lands,
      Like a chief, to the rest of his race,
      With the honey-voiced woman who beckons and stands,
      And gleams like a dream in his face —
      Like a marvelous dream in his face?

  5. Angelicus
    Angelicus says:

    One of the several reasons, I would say the main one, of the idiotic Whites’ pathological altruism, is that vile Jewish heresy known as Christianity. Its contempt for racial differences and its pathetic “love your neighbour” regardless of his colour or appearance had lethal consequences for our people. To this, we must add the secular religion of the XX century: Democracy/Liberalism American or British style. The average White suffers from both of these diseases, no wonder we are in such a mess.

    The White race is heading towards a well-deserved culling. Most Whites are trash.

    • Anonyma
      Anonyma says:

      Large numbers of whites are infected with the Jewish bacillus and indeed need to be culled or they will end up destroying the rest of us.

      • Angelicus
        Angelicus says:

        That’s right my friend. Most Whites are trash, some of them fully brainwashed by the enemy and full of hatred towards their own people. They are the first ones that would be eliminated. Blacks may be stupid brutes but they think in terms of race and that makes all the difference. The moronic liberals don’t realize that and will pay for it!

        These self-hating White traitors will be exterminated in due course, like their predecessors, the corrupt and idiotic French noblemen who embraced and welcomed the French Revolution.

        • Bob
          Bob says:

          Sorry about the revolution stuff. As far as I can tell my family lived in France all this time by being fisherman. That’s what they did upon arrival in America. Anyway , this importation of cheap labor is ok. Most white people smoke crack and like rap music anyway. Nowhere near the tribalism of Jews…I’ve known several mulatto native Americans and they hate me…even though surely we have common indian ancestors. Regular Indians not so much…they like me 🙂 I won’t waste my time ever again but it is interesting to me to study. Of course… indian IQ is probably pretty low 😁

          • Angelicus
            Angelicus says:

            Hello Bob, now I understand the reference to the boat. You don’t deserve to be exterminated, that applies to the traitors as I explained. By the way, that is a funny little bird, it looks like a parrot, where did you get that?

        • Bob
          Bob says:

          I love all animals to a greater or lesser extent. Not so much wolves tho. It’s my dream to move to Alaska for awhile and I’m scared of them 🙂 but we’ll see how I feel when I get the money… Thailand looks interesting too. Heard you can spend all your money in ten years and be homeless in Thailand. Better to go back and forth for six months at a time.

        • Ned J. Casper
          Ned J. Casper says:

          @ Anonyma & Angelicus. Mass-murder of white people you disapprove by other whtes is not a practical, sensible, moral or necessary policy, and advocating it openly here is counter-productive.

          The chief lesson of the French Revolution is the fate of Robespierre whom you two resemble.

          • Angelicus
            Angelicus says:

            You have misunderstood the meaning of my comment. I did not advocate for the killing of White people, what I mean was it would simply happen as a consequence of the natural and logical evolution of the political situation. I admit I was not very clear in that regard.

            You obviously have not read Machiavelli neither understand

            Basically, blacks and browns will start killing Whitey when they realize that nobody will stop them. As I said before the only ones to blame are the Whites themselves, who, corrupted by Christianity and Liberalism, have turned into cowardly do-gooders ready to “turn the other cheek”.

            Regarding the killing of your enemies or the traitors within your party/country, there is nothing immoral in that. You obviously haven’t read Machiavelli or, if you did, you did not understand him. There is no room for sentimentality in politics. Either you exterminate your enemies or they will exterminate you. It is as simple as that.

            Let’s face it, hundreds of thousands of Whites have been enthusiastic supporters of the destruction of Western civilization and the White race in itself instilling self-hatred and guilt in every young White man and woman. Politicians, journalists, artists, academics, etc. They all deserve to die as the filthy traitors that they are.

    • Poupon Marx
      Poupon Marx says:

      The analogy of Christianity to humanity is one of a permanent hospital catheter in the vein, where toxins, parasites, and any deleterious substances can easily by introduced into the Caucasian Corpus. It is not native, not organic, an import, and highly likely weaponized to slowly weapon the Indo-European victim (patient).

      My opinion, which I can and will support at length and in detail.

    • Bob
      Bob says:

      the more I embrace Christianity…the more I love it 🙂 they say either in Pompeii…the Romans had killed a bunch of Jews or Christians and God toasted their town in retaliation. Jews say it was for destroying the Temple and Christians say it was martyrdom was the cause. It’s great to serve a God who can do this stuff…it’s facinating 🙂

  6. anonym
    anonym says:

    “As Otis Graham noted (2004, 80, the Jewish lobby on immigration “was aimed not just at open doors for Jews, but also for a diversification of the immigration stream sufficient to eliminate the majority status of western Europeans so that a fascist regime in America would be more unlikely.”

    The Jews, inadvertently, are doing everything “right” in facilitating a fascist regime. Opening the borders, displacing whites, destroying our home, ruining our economy, corrupting our politicians, making the whole middle east hate us for our wars for Israel, lying to us non stop, spreading hatred against whites… Pretty dumb. High IQ doesn’t mean much if you’re paranoid and warped.

    • Anonyma
      Anonyma says:

      It’s almost as if the Jews are unconsciously trying to precipitate the very thing they fear the most…

    • Kris
      Kris says:

      I am not sure myself. The ability to crush a nascent ‘fascist’ movement and institute sweeping ‘protections’ to ensure it can never happen again, might well be a godsend to them. Look at what came out of Trump, insofar as they could paint it as some Whites banding together. Relatively timid events, like Charlottesville and the capital ‘insurrection’ seem quite expedient for them.

  7. Karl
    Karl says:

    I wonder if an America made up primarily of Blacks and Hispanics will be a better country than we have now.

    I fear it will not be,

      • Pierre de Craon
        Pierre de Craon says:

        True enough, as far as it goes, but how many nations, other than the non-Israeli Jews, cotton to the idea of living as parasites in every more or less desirable portion of the planet rather than have recognized possession of a specific piece of turf that they call home?

  8. Hans Frank
    Hans Frank says:

    Hey, bacillus are not infectious parasites. They do good work most of the time. Tapeworms or hookworms might be a better comparison.

  9. Bob
    Bob says:

    The Catholic church doesn’t share in racism… they probably are going to take back over one day. Some countries are more or less Catholics completely. That’s the fatal flaw of racism. The white man could have Filipino friends and Mexico friends…but no…

    • Angelicus
      Angelicus says:

      What about the fatal flaw of Catholicism/Christianity? A ridiculous cult that goes against Nature denying the concept of race and the values and unique characteristics attached to it. Well, what can you expect of a cult whose moronic followers believed that there was a fellow called Jesus whose mother was a virgin, who walked over the water, resuscitate the dead and cured blind men? I rest my case.

      PS: Good luck with your Christian Black/Asian “brothers”! If you haven’t noticed yet they have segregated/race-based churches/communities. Only the moronic White Christians believe in that rubbish that “race is just a social contract”!

      • Pierre de Craon
        Pierre de Craon says:

        Culpable ignorance is morally debilitating by itself, but when it is compounded with calumny and hatred, it moves into a realm from which its perpetrator-occupant will find escape exceedingly difficult, even with the best will in the world. May you be one of the few fortunate enough to find the way back to the light of truth.

Comments are closed.