Featured Articles

Antifa Goat Dancers in the Fairy Tale of Harz: Open Letter to Mr. Bodo Ramelow, Minister President of the State of Thuringia, Germany

/19 Comments/in /by

Mr. Bodo Ramelow
Minister President
State of Thuringia
Postfach 90 02 53
99105 Erfurt
Tel. 0049  361 37-900
email: bodo.ramelow@tsk.thueringen.de

Dear Mr. Ramelow,

As one of the participants at a cultural gathering, organized by the monthly Volk in Bewegung, and held at a fairytale place in the heart of the Harz Mountains, I need to take issue with your decision to dispatch to our venue, at midnight, September 1, 2017, a squadron of riot police. I am writing this letter to you in English, for the simple reason that I intend to inform about this police fiasco some media and government circles in the USA. Apparently, your decision to send the police to the venue was based on your presumption, or better yet on someone’s denunciation, that a dangerous group of people was allegedly preparing an armed uprising in the Harz Mountains. The decision to send the police, however, turned out to be an exercise in the grotesque, worthy of the surreal Harz fairy tale “The Sandman” by the German classic E.T.A Hoffmann.  What the police encountered there were not dangerous right-wing militia,  but basically a quasi-run-down senior citizen home containing approximately 100 guests, mostly septuagenarians and octogenarians in attendance, some in wheelchairs, some with crutches, lots of them in pajamas ( including myself). Many of the conference guests were former German expellees, 1945–50, from ex-communist Eastern Europe.  The police, however, did not find any illegal material — other than some guide dogs for the blind and handicapped, and lots and lots of goats pasturing in the nearby fields — presumably designated for future Antifa goat dancers.

I must commend the police officers on their professionalism. Their faces and gestures, after realizing where they had landed, showed a great deal of embarrassment, with their comments teeming with excuses and apologies. Surely, it must have been a great disappointment for your government not to have spotted a single skinhead, or a single Nibelungen one eyed-Hagen, or a nose-ringed Hollywood Nazi among the conference attendants. I must admit, I was embarrassed by the sincere embarrassment of the police. They let me go back to my bungalow room after 10 minutes, after having taken photos of all of us and after having examined our IDs. I fully understand why there were no media and camera people around — it would have been a huge media fiasco for the Thuringian government for having failed to spot a single Nazi in the Harz woods.

Yes, Mr. Ramelow, the whole nightly scenario reminded me of the police search of our family house back in communist Yugoslavia, back in the 1960’s and the harassment my late father, an ex-Catholic attorney had been regularly subject to by the former Yugoslav communist authorities. (In the early 1980’s he was adopted by the AI and several US senators as a prisoner of conscience).

But Mr. Ramelow, I am also aware of your leftist-antifa past too—and the past of some German leftist RAF (Red Army Faction) terrorists who had enjoyed safe haven in the 1970’s in communist Yugoslavia.  Alas, the wheels of fortune keep spinning forever, as Friedrich Schiller wrote. I saw it first hand, when after the break-up of Yugoslavia, some former communist snitches in the newly born Croatia, in 1991, either committed suicide, or were “suicided.” Well, I guess we don’t need Schiller’s Wallenstein’s periscopes to predict a very non-astral future of Germany. In a grotesque craving for a world certificate of a “nazifrei” Deutschland, Germany’s official doubling-down on the “fight against the right”, won’t help  you get the stigma of Nazism off  your own back.  This fake self-denial in the face of the looming crisis in Germany reminds me much of the late American rock singer Frank Zappa — who was very popular in Germany when we were both younger, and who aptly ridiculed in his songs the self-denying  Nazi Hurensohn who remade himself into a big time Liberal and Antifa.

I regret that you couldn’t have made it to our literature event. We had good scholarly talks; a gent spoke on the diplomacy of Russia, from Friedrich the Great to Angela. Merkel. Another gentleman spoke on China — a rising Pacific superpower.  My speech, in German, was on significant intellectual changes in the USA, the rise of Donald Trump, the Alt-Right, the American Freedom Party, and how changes in the USA will affect Germany’s day-to-day life in the very near future.  Ms. Ursula Haverbeck at the advanced age of 88  gave a 1½ hour non-stop talk, with perfect syntax and no text reading, pointing to some disparities between the famed German Criminal Code # 130 (describing penalties for “Incitement to hatred”) and the famous German GG ( Constitution) Article #5 on free speech (“There shall be no censorship.”), in the best of all the German worlds .

Last but not least, I regret that you couldn’t have come to hear my speech. I would have gladly given you a free copy of my latest book/novella Titans are in Town, with my dedication — for you only.

Sincerely,

Dr. Tom Sunic
(author, fmr US professor, fmr Croat diplomat)
Zagreb, Croatia
www.tomsunic.com
cell. 00385 91 1722 783

 

 

 

Renewing Christendom

/65 Comments/in , , /by

Dissident Dispatches: An Alt-Right Guide to Christian Theology
Andrew Fraser
London: Arktos, 2017

Andrew Fraser was for most of his career a professor of law at Macquarie University in Sydney. He was catapulted to prominence in July, 2005, by a letter to a local newspaper warning against the importation of Sudanese refugees into Australia: “Experience everywhere in the world shows us that an expanding black population is a sure-fire recipe for increases in crime, violence and other social problems.” The controversy surrounding the letter resulted in his departure from Macquarie.

In 2011, he published The WASP Question, a book which examines the failure of Anglo-Saxons around the world—the “invisible race”—to maintain a conscious ethnic identity and defend their collective interests:

The defining characteristic of WASPs [he wrote] is that they are much less ethnocentric than other peoples; indeed, for all practical purposes Anglo-Saxon Protestants appear to be all but completely bereft of in-group solidarity. They are therefore open to exploitation by free-riders from other, more ethnocentric, groups.

In the course of studying Anglo-Saxon origins, he came to appreciate the role played by the Christian Church in transforming a bunch of squabbling Germanic tribes into the English nation. It would be impossible to guess from looking at contemporary Christianity that the church could ever have served such a function. The privatization of worship since the Enlightenment has been so successful a revolution that many Christians are unaware of it, imagining it simply the nature of their faith to be a private affair.

Nothing could be farther from the truth. Medieval Christianity “was a way of life, a communion, and a faith practiced in public and private by all manner of men and women,” as Fraser points out. The Bible did not merely “serve individual believers as witness to the word and work of God,” but also “provided the sacred charter” of the church. But if the Christian Church presided over the formation of the English nation, might the retreat of Christianity into the private realm have contributed to the downfall of proud Anglo-Saxon nationhood within the last several decades?

With such questions in mind, Fraser, already of an age to retire, made the unusual decision to enroll as an undergraduate at a nearby divinity school. The school turned out to be a “hotbed of multiculturalist ideology,” and at one point he was suspended for an entire year due to complaints of his “intolerance” from students and faculty members. But he persisted, and in 2015 was awarded a Bachelor of Theology degree.

Dissident Dispatches is the record of his experiences as a student. The book includes papers written for course credit (with his lecturer’s comments), accounts of his skirmishes with the politically correct, and subsequent personal reflections on both. It is arranged chronologically rather than thematically, giving it the feel of a miscellany, but a consistent theological and political perspective underlies the whole. Weighing in at over 500 pages, the volume is best digested in short installments. What follows is merely a summary of a few of the main themes. Read more

Bad Medicine I: The Sickening Truth About Britain’s Foreign ‘Doctors’

/64 Comments/in /by

Manish Shah: Charged with 118 sexual crimes against his patients

An Essex-based family doctor of Indian origin, Manish Shah, has gone on trial in London charged with 118 sexual offences against 54 of his patients, one of whom was under 13 at the time of Shah’s alleged predations. Although the sordid details of the accusations against Shah are yet to fully emerge, we know that the former general practitioner has been charged by the police and Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) with 65 counts of assault by penetration, 52 counts of sexual assault and one of sexual assault of a child.

The case is headline news in the UK, where the number of charges is so staggering that the media has been forced to take notice. Quite predictably, however, the mainstream press has refused to contextualize this horrific case within an increasingly apparent ethnic context, and coverage thus far has been dominated by bland descriptions of Shah as a “London doctor” or “Romford doctor.”

In the following essay I want to break the taboo on critique of foreign physicians by analyzing the promotion of foreign doctors in multicultural propaganda, and then offering a counter-narrative of the reality behind the lies  – a disturbing record of mass sexual abuse, malpractice, and gross incompetence. Reaching beyond the merely anecdotal, my source material for the latter exploration will be the publicly available records and decisions of Britain’s Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS). As the public body most responsible for protecting the public from bad physicians (by stripping them of license to practice), the records of the MPTS should be considered more reliable and complete than police and CPS statistics concerning the disturbing, and growing, problem of foreign doctors in Britain.

In the third chapter of his recently published The Strange Death of Europe, Douglas Murray lists a number of excuses or lies that have duped European populations into believing that multiculturalism shouldn’t be resisted. These are grouped under the headings ‘Economic,’ ‘An Ageing Population,’ ‘Diversity,’ and ‘The Idea that Immigration is Unstoppable Because of Globalisation.’ Although perhaps implied under economic considerations, Murray failed to significantly explore the often absurd justifications for multiculturalism offered in the name of national infrastructure or public services. This is particularly important because the British people are frequently informed that immigrants are crucial to the smooth functioning of their health service. (Murray does tackle another aspect of this myth by pointing to the fact that Britain’s financially exhausted health service spends more than £20 million every year just on translation services for foreign-born patients.[1]) Read more

The Notion of Racial Diversity in German Academia and National-Socialist Legislation, Part 1

/16 Comments/in , /by

Introduction

What follows below are the translations of several excerpts from rare books and essays on race published by prominent German legal scholars, biologists, and medical doctors who were also high ranking members of the National Socialist Party in before and during World War II. The focus of the translated passages is on verbal, legal and sociological analyses of race. It is not TOO’s, or for that matter my intent, to whitewash National Socialism or glorify the works of its academic or military spokesman. The fact that after the NS seizure of power the number of NS  party members skyrocketed from the modest 800,000 to 8 million members by 1943, a number which also included a large number of world-known German scientists and academics, proves time and again that opportunism and intellectual duplicity among scholars is nothing new. Dominant ideas, however bizarre, or dangerous they may ultimately sound, as long as they are shielded by the ruling class and its police, will always attract cheerleaders among herds of glory-hungry academics, limelight searchers, and a host of circumstantial sycophants. Many of them will quickly disavow their beliefs when different cultural or ideological trends start lurking on the political horizon.

The great danger, however, lies in the fact that dominant political ideas invariably have an impact on the definition of natural science — and never the other way around. Hence it is a waste of time today trying to convince the political adversary on racial differences by inundating him/her with empirical data, especially if dominant ideas espoused by elites are hostile in advance to any discussion about race. Facts are seldom important—what counts is the interpretation of facts.

The sole intent of these essays is to point out significant semantic and conceptual errors arising today with the usage of former German political and legal concepts related to the issue of race which, while common in higher education and politics in NS Germany, often turned after World War II into demonic misnomers. Following Donald Trump’s election to US presidency, accompanied by the ongoing language distortions in the media and higher education, aka “fake news”, and in light of the mass arrival of non-White migrants to the US and EU, as well as the increased racialization of political discourse, some parallels in intellectual climate between Weimar and NS Germany and the EU and the US today can be drawn. Read more

Assault on Psychology: Research on Race Differences Anathematized

/63 Comments/in , /by

Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) has been called the Father of Modern Science. So it is fitting that he was, perhaps, the first scientist to be censured and silenced by political forces represented in his day by the Catholic Church. The issue then was evidence Galileo presented supporting the Copernican heliocentric model of the solar system that contradicted the Aristotelian geocentric theory espoused by the establishment.

Elites have often used science to support the dominate ideology while suppressing evidence incompatible with their beliefs. One notable case was the rise of Lysenkoism in the Soviet Union during the reign of Joseph Stalin. Trofim Lysenko (1898–1976), a Ukrainian biologist, rejected Mendelian genetics in favor of the inheritance of environmentally acquired characteristics. This theory won favor because it fit well with the creation of the New Soviet Man: human nature was not innate, but as malleable and adaptable as were the characteristics of spring wheat.

The ideological orthodoxy of today is egalitarian multiculturalism, sometimes described as social or cultural Marxism. According to this doctrine the perceived differences between racial groups are superficial physical traits or cultural characteristics determined externally by history and the social environment.  All ethnic groups have equal potential for social development. A multicultural society is the most desirable and progressive social arrangement. There are no legitimate group interests that would preclude social harmony in a diverse and inclusive society.

Over the past half century, as social Marxism has tightened its ideological grip on the main stream media (MSM), education, corporations and the government, very few public persons have challenged its canon. But a handful of social scientists, mainly psychologists, have, along with Galileo, gone where the evidence led them. Because psychology deals with intelligence and behavior, the field is especially important for egalitarians to control. This essay will take a brief look at five psychologists who have contested established dogmas, and paid a price for doing so. Read more

Gender Bender: Feminist Ideology Goes Off the Deep End

/39 Comments/in /by

Recurring in feminist ideology is the notion that gender expression and gender roles are almost entirely based upon expectations set by society, not biology. Feminists often take issue with the “gendering” of toys, characters, and expectations. On some fundamental level, I do not take issue with the idea that sex roles can change throughout history. Throughout cultures the world over, and through the ages, men and women have held many different roles in different societies. The idea of fluidity makes sense; it accounts for historical changes in masculine behavior (think Vikings vs. modern Swedes). Fluidity as a concept allows for variances in biology and traits between men and women.

People should be free to do, say, and be, whatever they want. The issue I have with modern feminist theory is the idea that culture, not biology, plays by far the most important role in shaping behavior. Not only do feminists assail the idea of “traditional” gender roles, they are working towards making it illegal to even notice fundamental biological realities. Further, they assert that society not only shapes the roles men and women occupy in society but also that there are no biologically based differences at all between men and women.

This anti-biologism leads to the idea that gender is anything a person wants it to be — that a person could decide to change gender identification as often as [insert pronoun] wants — even from day to day. The theory that gender is completely voluntary and has nothing to do with hormones or body parts is having effects in the real world. New York City passed a law that makes it illegal to address a person by the wrong title, pronouns, or gender. All businesses, professionals, and landlords are required to address a person by their preferred title or pronoun. If a man wants to be referred to as “her”, “ze”, “xir”, or any other randomly imagined name, employers, professionals, and landlords are required by law to abide, else they face a fine of $125,000 to $250,000. “Mis-gendering” a person, is now illegal in New York City. The law also includes provisions to inhibit enforcing a “gendered” dress code at work. Meaning, you cannot ask a male employee not to wear a dress and high heels to work anymore.

In California, State Senator, Scott Weiner, has introduced a bill that would require care facilities to accommodate a person’s preferred gender and pronoun. If they do not comply, they would face a fine and a prison sentence of up to one year. Weiner also introduced a bill that would make it no longer a felony to knowingly transmit HIV. The bill applies not only to failing to disclose your HIV status to sexual partners but to blood donations as well. Read more

The Moral Battle

/61 Comments/in , /by

From the beginning of Trump’s candidacy I expected and hoped that it would accelerate racial polarization and White radicalization as well as discredit the anti-White media and its false narratives. As that racial polarization — the Great Divide — occurs, our success or failure, and with it the life or death of our race, will depend on how many of the people of our race break to our side of the divide. If it is most of them, we will probably win and our race will be saved. If not, our chances will be greatly diminished, and for something of this importance, this seriousness, with this much — literally the life or death of our race — at stake, we must take the utmost care to maximize our chances.

In April 1989 I gave a talk at a gathering of Instaurationists entitled “Creating a Moral Image.” It was well received and Wilmot Robertson published it in the August, 1989 issue of Instauration. It turned out to be the most controversial essay yet to appear in its pages. According to Wilmot most of the criticism was of a very low quality, too low even for the “Safety Valve,” but he did publish one essay-length response which, like the other criticism, wrongly saw my paper as a pacifistic rejection of warrior values. The critics missed the main point of the essay — the decisive battle for the hearts and minds of our people is being fought on the battlefield of morality. Violence per se was rejected only if it was immoral (by public perception and/or traditional Western standards) or counter-productive, and the example I cited was clearly both. I maintained that those who practiced or preached such immoral violence, or in any other way projected an immoral public image, were hurting our cause and playing into our opponents hands.

Over twenty-eight years later, in the wake of the “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, we see how little has changed, how clearly our battle is still one of morality, and how the points I made in that essay are, if anything, even more true now than they were then (see also “Moral Capital and White Interests“). Our anti-White opponents know this well, but too many pro-White activists have yet to heed the lesson. The storm now shaking the country, and the whole of the Western world, including the Trump administration, is one of perverse anti-White values and policies presented as consensus traditional and universal morality. Our anti-White antagonists were given, or arranged, the opening or opportunity they were looking for and took full advantage of it at our expense. They seized the moral high ground and from those heights are showering us with a torrent of moral invective, denunciation, condemnation and epithets, creating false pretexts to justify suppression of our message, our platforms and our gatherings as our moral image seems to have been dragged to new lows. Read more