Featured Articles

When Tanveer Met Asad: Vibrant Vignettes from the Modern West

/17 Comments/in , /by

Is there such a thing as an admirable murderer? I’m not sure, but I do know a good candidate for the title: a New Briton called Tanveer Ahmed. He was the devout Sunni Muslim who drove hundreds of miles in March 2016 to hold a theological debate with a devout Ahmadi Muslim called Asad Shah.

The debate consisted of Tanveer stabbing and stamping Asad to death outside the shop owned by the latter in Glasgow. I don’t admire the murder, but I do admire Tanveer’s behaviour afterwards: he made no attempt to evade justice, pleaded guilty without hesitation, and happily accepted the long prison sentence that he received in August 2016. If Britain still had the death penalty, I’m sure that he would have accepted that just as happily.

Murderers for Muhammad

And why not? Like his hero Mumtaz Qadri, “The Martyr with a Machine-Gun,” he had committed murder for the noblest of reasons, defending the honour of the Prophet Muhammad and despatching a blasphemer to hell-fire. He had a subjective feeling of certainty and he acted on it in a way that has strengthened his version of Islam. Mainstream Muslims do not believe in rationalism, scepticism or liberal democracy. They marched in large numbers around the world to express their outrage at Salman Rushdie’s The Satanic Verses (1988) and the Muhammad cartoons published in Denmark in 2005. They did not march to express outrage at the Charlie Hebdo massacre or the murder of Asad Shah.

Tanveer Ahmed in the Daily RecordMurderer for Muhammad: Tanveer Ahmed

Read more

What to read? (Part 6): A White Character Survey; Envy in Literature and Politics (Part 2)

/15 Comments/in , , /by

saraceni

Carlo Saraceni (“The Fall of Icarus”) 1606, oil

Physical blindness and the verdict of ignorance, meted out to envious politicians in Dante’s epic poem, can often be bliss.  Eyelessness can have advantages, as demonstrated by the blind, poor, uneducated, self-effacing, albeit very intelligent seer, Tiresias, who is brought to the court of King Oedipus, only to announce to him his eyeless future of blind destiny (vv 364-377).

For that matter willful ignorance and dismissal of the brainwashing curriculum in the modern educational system in the US and EU can be a sign of a healthy state of mind. What on earth is to be seen in the political process in multicultural America and Europe today? What good can be learned in multiracial colleges in Europe, whose program consists of lessons on White man’s guilt? For centuries, in order to avoid envy-inducing temptations, high-IQ young introspective White European males opted for monastic life. The harmful side of monasticism was that it prevented good genes to be passed on to future offspring, thus leaving the political arena open to an array of genetic and character misfits: the bad, the ugly and the envious.

Lengthy is the list of authors, usually associated with the heritage of cultural conservatism, who have prodded into the roots of envy-driven politicians. Highly envious politicians are usually very cunning individuals, with above average IQ, possessing, in addition, good skills at camouflaging their moral sleaziness with an aura of tearful humanitarian palaver. They also excel at expressions of sympathy for the plight of their future prey.

This brings to mind is the huge literature on so-called Jewish social mimicry, aka “trickster-do-good-Jews” (“Mauscheljuden”), popularized in National Socialist Germany by the works of Theodor Fritsch and Arthur Trebitsch, and scores of other writers. Read more

What to read? (Part 5) A White Character Survey: Envy in Politics and Literature (Part 1)

/14 Comments/in , /by

 

gericault

Théodore Géricault, “Envious woman,” oil 1822

Among Europeans, since antiquity, envy and jealousy have been main driving forces in the political process, resulting in a treasure trove of different literary genres. All European languages make a fine distinction between envy and jealousy, although both notions often overlap. The Germans have an additional nuanced word for this character aberration, i.e. “Schadenfreude,” a compound noun literally meaning when someone rejoices over someone else’s bad luck.

Today, the notion of schadenfreude may apply to Whites who savor the professional failure of their racial next-of-kin. Schadenfreude has been for centuries a dominant feature among White intellectuals, rulers and politicians, although for obvious reasons, none of them has ever been eager to publicly admit this character defect. Outbursts of poorly concealed envy can be observed today among a number of White nationalists, White self-appointed leaders, and White spokesmen, faking sympathy and compassion for their better-skilled rivals on the one hand, yet gleefully gloating in private over their next-of-kin’s minor faux pas on the other. Over the last half a century envy and jealousy have been the prime reason for the lack of unity among so-called White movements and parties in Europe and the USA.

The most glaring case study of the destructive envy can be observed today among individuals critical of celebrity billionaire Donald Trump and his beautiful wife and intelligent, attractive children, who in turn are now being assaulted by a lethal barrage of pathological envy and jealousy, not only by predictable envy-ridden non-White detractors, but also by more intelligent, jealous White rivals. The late French-Romanian philosopher of gloom and doom, Emile Cioran, a household name among Alt-Right and New-Right intellectuals and sympathizers, describes political rivalry as just another shorthand for the envy contest.

More or less all humans are envious; politicians are absolutely envious. One becomes envious insofar as one can’t stand anybody next to himself or above himself.  Engaging oneself in a project, a project of any kind, even the most trivial one, means sacrificing oneself to envy — the supreme prerogative of all humans (French original, p. 1009).

Read more

The Lying Press looks Inward

/22 Comments/in , , /by
Fact

Articles from one day, August 16, in the Washington Post daily email. Included are all articles related to the election. There were no articles with Hillary in the headline included in the email.

There has been some introspection among a few mainstream journalists, who have stepped back and asked themselves, have we gone over the top in our media campaign against Donald Trump? We should be cautious in attributing this to integrity, something we haven’t seen too much of in the media.  But every now and again we get some nuggets of truth, even from the least likely sources; ironically, those whose job it is to bring us the truth: journalists.

As one of the self-reflective articles from The Week points out, there is apparently a collective decision on behalf of the media that “any pretense of covering the campaign dispassionately deserves to be thrown out the window.”  I would suggest that this is provoked by the prospect of Trump representing the interests of Whites, who thus far have been content to be exploited as a tax-cow for the benefit of foreign and domestic parasites. The anti-Trump media offensive was described on Fash the Nation recently as a “saturation bombing,” which is an apt metaphor, as this feels like a war.

It has come to the point where one questions whether we actually have a democracy if public opinion is molded with such a heavy hand, and with such sinister coordination. Rush Limbaugh, who for whatever his limitations, is quite deft at parsing media bias, opined about the campaign, “It is one-sided like we’ve never seen before, and I don’t know how to overcome it.” I had a friend from work text me this summer asking if Trump were dropping out of the race (one of the disinformation campaigns from Clinton/media), which confirmed that these smears are all too effective.  We may seethe at the transparent agenda, but ordinary working people who don’t care too much about politics likely take what they see on TV at face value, and that is a little concerning to say the least.   Read more

Jewish Fear and Loathing of Donald Trump (5): Would Trump’s Defeat Be Blamed On Jews?

/21 Comments/in , , , /by

donaldtrumpataipac

Posted at Vdare.com

See previous articles in this series.

Almost exactly a year ago, VDARE.com Editor Peter Brimelow raised the question of whether America’s Jewish groups would turn on Donald Trump (who after all has Jewish grandchildren and a lifetime of Jewish business associates) with the hysteria they employed against Patrick J. Buchanan. I have been tracking the matter ever since and the answer is now in: yes—clearly triggered by visceral reaction against Trump’s nationalist acceptance speech in Cleveland and outright panic at his subsequent poll lead (July 25-29 according to the Real Clear Politics average). I suspect, however, that we have crossed a watershed and that, regardless of the results of this election, this will not end well for them.

Before the convention, Wall Street Journal Deputy Editorial Page Editor Bret Stephens [Email him] said with astonishing arrogance: “It’s important that Donald Trump and what he represents—this kind of ethnic quote, ‘conservatism,’ or populism be so decisively rebuked that the Republican Party, the Republican voters will forever learn their lesson…” WSJ‘s Bret Stephens: Trump Must Lose So Badly That the GOP Voters ‘Learn Their Lesson’, by Sam Reisman, Mediaite, May 29 2016.

Just on Friday, Paul Krugman [Email him] writing in the New York Times continued the now-widespread theme: any expression of ethnic identity by America’s whites, no matter how implicit, was “bigoted” and “white nationalist”:

Recently Avik Roy, a leading Republican health-policy expert, had the personal and moral courage to admit what liberals (and political scientists) have been saying for years: “In reality, the gravitational center of the Republican Party is white nationalism.”

Just to be clear, I’m not saying that top Republicans were or are personally bigoted—but that doesn’t matter. What does matter is that they were willing to curry favor with bigots in the service of tax cuts for the rich and financial deregulation. Remember, Mitt Romney eagerly accepted a Trump endorsement in 2012, knowing full well that he was welcoming a racist conspiracy theorist into his camp.

All that has happened this year is a move of those white nationalists from part of the supporting cast to a starring role.

Pieces of Silver, August 12, 2016 (links in original)

Read more

White Alert: Organize or Suffer the Consequences

/28 Comments/in , /by

White Americans must act to promote and protect their legitimate interests. Section one explains why organization is essential; section two proposes what forms the organization should take; and section three offers possibilities for personal action toward achieving those goals.

Section I

Very unpleasant consequences await us if we fail to organize. For the necessary motivation, we must fully appreciate the perils that loom ahead if we don’t change course.

Today we hear that we possess something called “White privilege,” an unearned advantage which keeps all other groups under our thumb. But the reality is quite different. We now have an immigration policy that is dead set on making Whites, the historic majority of America, a minority within the next 25 years or so. If current projections stay on course, our percentage of the population could sink to 40 percent or lower by the end of this century. Demography is indeed destiny, and this decline certainly will lead to loss of power and influence.

Whites at present have more per capita wealth than Blacks and Hispanics, though somewhat less wealth than Asians. Our assets, however, are being transferred to Blacks and Hispanics through taxation to fund various social programs and welfare. At the same time, our earning power is being limited by so-called “affirmative action,” a policy of government-promoted racial discrimination against White Americans in the job market and education.

Its original justification was to provide an even playing field for Blacks because they had a claim on our conscience for past discrimination. But today the benefits of affirmative action go to all non-Whites, including immigrants and their descendants who have no historic claim on America at all. And among them are the Asians who already exceed Whites in average income.

With the White electorate declining and the non-White electorate increasing, the transfer of wealth will continue unabated and perhaps will accelerate. Politicians in the not so distant future, for example, may cut Social Security and Medicare, programs which tend to benefit elderly Whites and transfer the savings to Medicaid, a program that disproportionately helps minorities—who are on their way to becoming the majority. As for affirmative action, would this rising majority of minorities vote to give it up? Perhaps, but probably not. Read more

Thought control in the UK: Britain’s state-sponsored intimidation of Whites

/24 Comments/in /by

The Muslim child rape gangs are back on the streets of Rotherham and bolder than ever. The Daily Express has revealed that carloads of Muslims are openly harassing girls, threatening their parents and moving around completely untroubled by the recent scandal. They have no fear of the cowed White population, much less the police or anyone else in authority.

But it would be wrong to think that the police are doing nothing about racial tension in the UK. This week a White man was convicted for making “grossly offensive” comments about Muslims on Facebook after the slaughter in Nice. This follows the jailing of another White man for tweeting his anger at a left-wing politician who demanded that more refugees be brought into Britain.

Despite the lip-service over concern about Muslim rape gangs, the authorities know their efforts must be focused on suppressing White rage. The Brexit referendum showed this is just underneath the surface, and with the discreet dispersal of thousands of Syrian refugees into poorer parts of the country at the end of June and July, what was needed was a not-too-subtle wave of intimidation. This has been achieved by way of a transparently bogus hate-crime campaign launched in the days after Brexit.

As if on some pre-arranged signal, there was, across the country, a flood of stories about how the Brexit vote had triggered a nationwide “hate crime” epidemic in which “hate crimes” went up 42% after the  vote. Why the victorious side would be stirred to such anger is not clear. Could it be that this scaremongering campaign was planned well in advance? Read more