Featured Articles

The First Leftist Genocide of the Twentieth Century

/36 Comments/in , /by

There is good reason why President Obama avoids using the word ‘genocide’ to describe the killing of one-and-a-half million Armenians in the Ottoman Empire.

This is because if you scratch almost any methodical mass killing in modern times, you are almost certain to find Liberals and Leftists pulling the strings. So it was with the first major holocaust of the twentieth century, the massacre of the Armenians and other Christian minorities that started about one hundred years ago today.

This prolonged atrocity, which included countless acts of rape, torture, and even crucifixion, and which saw tens of thousands taken out into the Black Sea and drowned, while many more were marched out into the deserts to die of starvation and disease, was carried out by the Ottoman Empire. This superficial fact conjures up an image of Oriental despotism of the sort we normally associate with the likes of Tamerlane or even Ivan the Terrible.

In other words, the implicit image of these massacres that exists in the popular mind is of dark deeds carried out at the behest of an absolute monarch, embodying the forces of traditionalism, conservatism, and even ethnic nationalism. But nothing could be further from the truth. By the time of the genocide, the Ottoman Empire of popular imagination had ceased to exist. The Sultan of the Ottoman Empire at the time of the genocide was Mehmed V, a gentle and ineffectual man, who has been described as follows:

The very appearance of Mehmed V suggests nonentity. Small and bent, with sunken eyes and deeply lined face, an obesity savoring of disease, and a yellow, oily complexion, it certainly is not prepossessing. There is little or no intelligence in his countenance, and he never lost a haunted, frightening look, as if dreading to find an assassin lurking in some dark corner ready to strike and kill him. The Near East from Within

By 1913, he had been reduced to a mere figurehead and pawn by a series of coup d’états, which had placed the leaders of the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) in absolute power. Read more

Truth, Honesty and Faith in Allah: The Rise and Fall of Lutfur Rahman

/28 Comments/in , /by

Do you have a deep respect for the integrity of lawyers? Do you have an abiding trust in the veracity of Muslims? Then I’m afraid you’re going to be sadly disappointed by Lutfur Rahman and his many supporters. This highly trained lawyer made history as Britain’s first Muslim mayor, winning two elections in the proudly vibrant London borough of Tower Hamlets. Now he has made history again: a high-court judge called Richard Mawrey has just ruled that Rahman is guilty of corruption and illegal practices. He has been stripped of his mayoralty and barred from standing in any future election.

Triumph of the Villains

It’s a final triumph for Rahman’s racist and Islamophobic enemies, who could not bear to see a brown-skinned Muslim mayor fighting for the oppressed and impoverished Bangladeshi residents of Tower Hamlets. That, at least, is the story Rahman and his supporters will now be spinning. And why not? Accusations of racism and Islamophobia have proved very useful to Muslims who combine gross corruption with farcical incompetence. This is an extract from the judge’s ruling in the electoral court:

Though Mr Penny [Rahman’s lawyer] did his best to counter the allegations by calling many witnesses who claimed to have attended polling stations without observing anything amiss, the body of evidence to the contrary was overwhelming and convincing. By contrast, the witnesses for Mr Rahman were not always very impressive. Quite obviously Mr Rahman and his team had rounded up a large number of sympathetic voters and had handed them pro forma witness statements with only the name of the witness and of the polling station to be filled in. Witnesses whose command of English turned out in the witness box to be rudimentary nonetheless produced polished English prose in their witness statements containing words that appeared to baffle them in cross-examination. The occasional witness claimed to have typed out his witness statement himself, oblivious to the fact that its appearance was absolutely identical to that of other (allegedly unconnected) witnesses. The nadir came when one witness gave a graphic account of how he had attended a polling station to cast his vote and found it a haven of tranquillity, only to be confronted by Mr Hoar with absolutely incontrovertible evidence that the witness had, in fact, voted by post well before polling day and could not have voted in person on the day. (Judge’s Ruling on the Mayoral Election held in Tower Hamlets on 22nd May 2014)

I bet he did vote on the day. Corruption and incompetence are characteristic of the Third World, but that is exactly what you would expect in Tower Hamlets: the Muslim “community” there is a Third World colony in a First World nation. If you import Third World people, you will get Third World behaviour. This isn’t difficult to understand, but liberals resolutely refuse to understand it. Instead, they perform a traditional cultic ritual: they wring their hands and lament the inevitable consequences of their own policies. The Guardian is upset by “the division that has blighted [Tower Hamlets] for more than five years.” Can you believe that? Mass immigration by non-White Muslims into a White Christian nation has led to “division.” And Muslims who are corrupt in Bangladesh are also corrupt in Britain. Who could have foreseen it? Read more

Stamford Hill and the Campaign against the “Jewification of Britain”

/37 Comments/in , /by

Until a few years, or even one year, ago I wouldn’t have believed that an anti-Jewish —(not anti-Israel) mass protest by Whites (not by Muslims) could have taken place in Britain.

And yet, a march against the “Jewification of Great Britain” was planned by Joshua Bonehill, the 22-year-old leader of National Liberation. Scheduled for 22 March, it was called “Liberate Stamford Hill”, after an area of north-east London home to about 20,000 Jews. This is a poster of the proposed demo, which according to The Guardian was reading: “On 22nd of March as one white and unified mass movement we will be finally pointing the finger in the right direction … You owe it to your race white man.” Read more

Drowning in Altruism: Thoughts on White Pathology and the Invasion of Europe

/111 Comments/in , , /by

‘The worst of charity is that the lives you are asked to preserve are not worth preserving.’
     Ralph Waldo Emerson, The Conduct of Life (1860) 

Here at TOO we are increasingly concerned with the origin, nature, and expression of pathological altruism in Whites. While there are a number of causes behind our rapid biological and cultural decline, this is surely one of the most potent, and it requires urgent and ongoing attention. I recently spent an evening reading a large amount of material on the deaths of Africans attempting to illegally enter Europe. It wasn’t long before I was confronted with an outpouring of White angst over the drowning of a disputed number of African invaders. On webpage after webpage, in one of the strangest contortions of logic imaginable, I witnessed Europe being slandered with murder for failing to facilitate an entirely risk-free method of invasion. All of the tropes about evil Whites were brought into play. The Maltese Prime Minister said the deaths were “nothing less than genocide,” and Swedish MEP Cecilia Wikström compared the deaths to “the Holocaust”:

I think that my children and grandchildren are going to ask why more wasn’t done to help people running away from Isis, or violence in Eritrea or wherever, when we knew that people were dying in their thousands. People will ask the same question they did after the war, ‘if you were aware, why didn’t you do something?’ In Sweden we allowed our railroads to be used to transfer Jews to Nazi death camps.

The hand-wringing of the politicians was matched by an outpouring of fashionable grief from White social justice types. On social media platforms Whites are straining to display their moral credentials, and thus increase their social status among peers, by trying to express the most indignation at ‘Europe’s failure.’ Academics, along with the media one of the main sources of cultural control, joined in the European festival of self-hate. Consider the remarks of Dr Tom Vickers, of Northumbria University’s Department of Social Sciences:

The people drowning in their hundreds in the Mediterranean are the victims of securitised immigration controls, imperialist wars, and an approach to immigration policy that places profit before people. Of course we should demand that EU states do everything possible to save people from drowning, and we should also demand a safe means for them to cross into Europe and equal rights with citizens when they arrive.

Read more

Monotheism vs. Polytheism

/46 Comments/in , /by

This piece below was first published in Chronicles (A Magazine of American Culture), April 1996.

Can we still conceive of the revival of pagan sensibility in an age so profoundly saturated by Judeo-Christian monotheism and so ardently adhering to the tenets of liberal democracy? In popular parlance the very word “paganism” may incite some to derision and laughter. Who, after all, wants to be associated with witches and witchcraft, with sorcery and black magic? Worshiping animals or plants, or chanting hymns to Wotan or Zeus, in an epoch of cable television and “smart weapons,” does not augur well for serious intellectual and academic inquiry.

Yet, before we begin to heap scorn on paganism, we should pause for a moment. Paganism is not just witches and witches’ brew; paganism also means a mix of highly speculative theories and philosophies. Paganism is Seneca and Tacitus; it is an artistic and cultural movement that swept over Italy under the banner of the Renaissance. Paganism also means Friedrich Nietzsche, Martin Heidegger, Charles Darwin, and a host of other thinkers associated with the Western cultural heritage. Two thousand years of Judeo-Christianity have not obscured the fact that pagan thought has not yet disappeared, even though it has often been blurred, stifled, or persecuted by monotheistic religions and their secular offshoots.

Undoubtedly, many would admit that in the realm of ethics all men and women of the world are the children of Abraham. Indeed, even the bolder ones who somewhat self-righteously claim to have rejected the Christian or Jewish theologies, and who claim to have replaced them with “secular humanism,” frequently ignore that their self-styled secular beliefs are firmly grounded in Judeo-Christian ethics. Abraham and Moses may be dethroned today, but their moral edicts and spiritual ordinances are much alive. The global and disenchanted world, accompanied by the litany of human rights, ecumenical society, and the rule of law—are these not principles that can be traced directly to the Judeo-Christian messianism that resurfaces today in its secular version under the elegant garb of modern “progressive” ideologies? Read more

Christianity and the Ethnic Suicide of the West

/85 Comments/in , , , /by

Several comments on my post “What’s wrong with the Swedes?” mention Christianity as a problem in the dispossession of Whites. I agree that Christianity is part of the problem, but I think there are several difficulties with supposing that it is a root cause of the problem.

  • First and foremost, Christianity was the religion of the West during its expansion around the world. A century ago, with the exception of China, Japan, Siam, Korea, Ethiopia, and Liberia, the rest of the planet was dominated by Christian Europeans. Christianity was at least consistent with this incredible expansion and with the very large increase in the European population that occurred during this period of expansion. If anything, the decline of the West has co-occurred with the decline of religion among Western elites. If the world had stayed the way it was in 1960, no one would be talking about the suicide of the West.
  • Christianity has been many things throughout the centuries—an ideology of ethnic defense during the Iberian Reconquista, a pillar of exploitative monarchies and aristocracies in Europe and Latin America, a force for ethnic defense against usurious exploitation of peasants by ethnic outsiders at times during the Middle Ages, supporting slavery and segregation in the American South and apartheid in South Africa. Christianity has not had a consistent message of ethnic suicide or moral universalism. People on both sides of the slave trade in 17th–18th-century Britain were Christian. Both sides of the American Civil War were Christian.
  • Throughout history, Christianity has been quite adept at rendering unto Caesar—accommodating to the powers that be. In the U.S. and I suppose elsewhere in the West, Christians had much more influence on culture prior to the 1960s and the rise of the secular left — e.g., spearheading the successful drive to rein in Hollywood depictions of sex and Christianity beginning in the 1920s. But all that ended with the cultural revolution of the 1960s which was certainly not Christian in inspiration. Right now, the powers that be are the secular, multi-cultural, pro-non-White-immigration left, and one of their main goals is the eradication of public displays of Christianity and traditional Christian views on marriage and the family. Christianity itself has been corrupted by the secular left, most obviously in the case of the Second Vatican Council but also including the mainline Protestant sects. The Church had stood for cultural conservatism and had been a bulwark against Jewish influence for centuries.

Read more

The Friends of Greville Janner

/21 Comments/in , /by

See also Francis Carr Begbie’s “The Silence of Greville Janner”

With the clamour of protest over the decision not to prosecute one of Britain’s most senior Jewish politicians over child rape allegations showing no sign of abating, it is worthwhile looking back at the career of the man at the centre.

Even without these lurid claims, Greville Janner must rank as one of the most unpopular specimens to ooze his way onto Parliament’s famous green benches.

With his pink carnation, clammy handshake and faint after burn of eau-de-cologne, his grinning approach was guaranteed to send a shiver down the spines of the toughest parliamentarians, even in his own Labour Party.

Nevertheless, this ingratiating, limp-wristed flatterer has prospered over the decades of his slithering along the corridors of power, not least due to his astute playing of the Jewish ethnic card.

His modus operandi was as a backroom operator, a Mr Fixit, a dispenser of favours and passer-on of messages. He was one of those types who would insist on doing someone a favour whether it was wanted or not. In his autobiography he says it was his mother who taught him his most important political lesson — there are few problems that could not be solved with a quiet word in the right ear. Read more